Defining "journalist" as we introduce journalism
This week's discussion about the The Free Flow of Information Act brings up the ongoing debate over just what is a journalist?
As our SPJ President Clint Brewer explained in his letter to Senator John Cornyn, it is best to "remain fluid" when defining a journalist. It's a matter of function rather than title (i.e. newspaper, television, radio, online reporters).
For journalism educators, this is a wake-up call for us as we define our classes, curricula and language in introducing the profession to our stuents.
Are our students still thinking when they sign up for Introduction to Journalism that they will get an introduction to newspapers, magazines and other PRINTED media?
To what extent are we conveying to our students this "fluidity" of which Brewer is speaking in his interactions with lawmakers?
With the passage of the Free Flow of Information Act (and we know it will pass eventually), we have some codifying of this concept called journalism.
I wonder how many journalism teachers are even making their students aware of the current definitional debates as they relate to the shield law?
As we prepare our syllabi for the upcoming fall semester (I'm working on mine as we speak), I think we ought to engage students in the same debates that the lawmakers are engaged. Leave room for an exercise that exposes the "messiness" of defining of our profession even as it's changing before our eyes.
Introducing journalism to a whole new generation in 2008 is not like introducing journalism in 1998. I know it's a cliche-- but it truly is a whole new world.
And, we journalism educators are charged with taking our students by the hand and ushering them in it.