Canthook

There's a constant argument over the role of the blogger or the "citizen-journalist" versus the mainstream media.

Unless, of course, you are on the side of the bloggers, in which case you think everyone is qualified to chip in their two cents worth.

It seems to me that the question boils down to what is journalism?

Robert Scoble has drawn a lot of fire, because he's a whore for the mainstream media.

Scoble talks about attending journalism school, but he couldn't be bothered to finish. He went to work for Dave Winer's Userland. He didn't make Userland successful. He went to work at NEC, promoting the Tablet PC. He didn't make them successful, either. He went to work for Microsoft, promoting the Tablet PC and Windows Vista. Hmmm. Do I detect a pattern? He left Microsoft to join Podtech. Another big ho-hum. He then moved to Fast Company.

Some people change companies often because the new company wants them a lot. Others seem to change companies a lot because the old company has learned how annoying the person can be. There is a "microscoble" unit used on Twitter; a person with a score of 1000 microscobes is as annoying as Scoble. There aren't many of them.

This afternoon, Hieronymus Murphy asserted, "@scobleizer is a journalist? What a sack of equine fertilizer!! Buwhahahaha! He's a well-paid cheerleader!!! Nothing more."

Scoble responded, "I think some people need a lesson on what journalism is. I point my camera at people and ask them questions. THAT is journalism."

But that's not journalism at all. At best, it's interrogation. As someone who was publishing newspapers when Scoble was still in kindergarten, I think I'm qualified to call him out on this.

A journalist is "someone who keeps a journal". The word "blog" comes from "web log", and the difference between a log and a journal? A log simply is a journal in which entries are kept sequentially, and timestamped. All bloggers are, by definition, journalists. Not all journals are logs. James A. Michener, for instance, was a journalist, when he wrote on the happenings at Kent State. His journal, "Kent State: What Happened and Why", was not a log, however.

While many people find Scoble annoying, that's not necessarily a fatal flaw. I've worked with quite a few annoying people over the years. Someone who is passionate about a vision will often be annoying, because their passion doesn't allow them to see problems associated with their vision, but few great things are accomplished without passion. That doesn't mean that annoying people always produce great things; sometimes, they're just annoying.

There is a notion that journalism is a profession. The characteristics of a profession is that the professional is an expert in an organized body of knowledge, and he dispenses his opinion on relevant matters, often in the form of a written document, to a clientele, according to a code of ethics.

That's a fairly tight definition, but I don't know of any better one. It results in the assumption, accepted in the UK but not in the US, that a family practice doctor is a professional, while a brain surgeon is not. The family practice doctor, after all, produces a diagnosis and perhaps orders a treatment in the form of a prescription, while a surgeon works with his hands, wielding a scalpel.

In any case, they argue that journalists should be ethical. Since 90% of a newspaper's income comes from advertising, and only 10% comes from circulation, that makes it difficult to argue for ethics; the presumption should be that newspapers are paid hacks. Broadcasters, being 100% supported by advertising, should be even worse.

I would argue that it makes sense for a journalist to be honest with his audience. If he is dishonest, his readers will not trust him, and his usefulness to the advertiser is gone. When I've done public relations writing for companies, I deliberately looked for shortcomings, preferably ones that would not matter to most potential customers, that I could feature in the stories I'd write. That sometimes was a hard sell to my customers.

I'd point out in stories about the cottages being built, for instance, that there was nothing much to do at the lake in mid-winter, so there's almost no insulation used in construction of the cottages. That would establish that the story is being honest. Of course, a lack of insulation means that air-conditioning works harder in the summer - but if you want to stay in air-conditioned comfort in the summer, you can do that by staying home. Cottages are all about keeping the windows open to catch a breeze wafting through.

There's a difference between what I used to do, and ham-handed puffery by a hack. Readers don't like ham-handed puffery, and especially, competent writers don't like ham-handed puffery. And far too often, it's decried as being unethical, when it's really just a matter of poor craftsmanship.

Consequently, I find myself standing up in defense of Scoble. He's not unethical at all.

They say that hard cases make bad law. I also know that the ACLU ends up defending some pretty unsavory characters when it comes to Bill of Rights issues. I support the ACLU, because I think the Bill of Rights is pretty important, and I realize that if the defendants weren't unsavory, nobody would want to step on their constitutional rights.

But sometimes, I kinda wish that the ACLU could win the case, but the defendant lose.
Other Bloggers On Related Topics:
ACLU - blogging - Dave Winer - Fast Company - journalism - media whore - microscoble - professional - puffery - Robert Scoble