From the Poynter Kent State Media Ethics Workshop

A few weeks ago I attended the Poynter Kent State Media Ethics Workshop and there was one statement made that really stuck out to me.

Kelly McBride, the Ethics Group Leader at the Poynter Institute, was one of the first speakers at the conference and discussed many issues relating to ethics, but one statement that I heard was: "everyone is a journalist."

Is this statement correct? Should everyone (every blogger, every website creator, every reporter, etc...) be considered a journalist?

Perhaps now that the internet is such a dominant force it is time to enforce more rules and regulations. But is that a breaching of the first amendment?

What if all individuals whom wanted to be considered a true "journalist" would need to get specific degrees, go through specific master's programs, or apply for some form of identification?

When McBride was discussing ethics and made the statement previously mentioned I can honestly say that the remaining time, or the majority of the remaining time, she was speaking I kept thinking about what defines a true journalist and whether it is right to consider everyone a journalist.

Is it right to consider only certain individuals as true journalists? Is it right to consider every james/jane doe as a journalist? Is it right to force individuals whom are already talented journalists to go through the schooling process? Is it right to make a "real" journalist pay dues to be considered a "real" journalist? Why defines a "real" journalist?

These are all questions to a true ethical dilemma. As i scoured the internet for answers I googled the topic "what defines a journalist."

Two answers I found were:

• "People who work in news and information, in print and broadcasting, call themselves journalists because journalism is what they do." -NPR Does this include bloggers? Anybody who says "I am working for myself and I am a blogging journalist?"
• Under an adopted amendment the Nieman Journalism Lab states that a journalist is defined as someone who: "(iii) obtains the information sought while working as a salaried employee of, or independent contractor for, an entity—
  (I) that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or other means; and
  (II) that—
  (aa) publishes a newspaper, book, magazine, or other periodical;
  (bb) operates a radio or television broadcast station, network, cable system, or satellite carrier, or a channel or programming service for any such station, network, system, or carrier;
  (cc) operates a programming service; or
  (dd) operates a news agency or wire service;"

Although these are two great examples, and one is an amendment, there seems to be some heavy interpretations that must go on when deciding whether an individual is to be considered a journalist or not. Perhaps more than an amendment is needed. Perhaps there should be more done for clarification.