Are bloggers journalists?

The Joplin Globe's website features a stable of bloggers designed to cash in on the phenomenon, with a little something there for everyone. Two Globe journalists, Editor Carol Stark with her blog about her battle with cancer, and Jeremiah Tucker, with his "Everyday Dude," designed to appeal to Generation X readers, provide the "professional" blogging, while other blogs are written by a number of diverse members of the community.
Perhaps the Globe is missing the boat on its bloggers. I stumbled across the blog "Journalism and Democracy," which appears to be written by students and former students of the University of Missouri School of Journalism and came across an engrossing debate on citizen journalism and whether bloggers can be called journalists.
As I was reading the comments, I came across an entry posted by the Globe's state political correspondent Sadie Gurman, which partially concerned The Turner Report, though not by name.
Ms. Gurman's post and the others, most of them coming from current MU students, made for absorbing reading, and I found myself agreeing with the writers on some points while vigorously disagreeing with them on others.
Since I was unable to find a link that would allow me to just access Ms. Gurman's post alone, permit me to reprint her post:

There's a lively and ongoing argument taking place via the "comments" box of a popular Joplin-area news blog. The spat sparked when the author bragged that he’d frequently scooped the prominent news outlets in the area, which in turn, were ripping ideas and reporting from his blog. The author, who has become quite well known to newspapers and television stations in the area, continued with the condescending remarks, including a detailed explanation of 'news reporting' and 'journalism.' Some commenters came to the defense of the local media, saying that newspapers and TV stations do a job this blogger couldn’t fathom doing without proper J-school training, reporting skills and effective writing techniques. And then the author makes a rebuttal, which is always something to the effect that when local media fail their readers, anyone can be a journalist.

For journalism students with Web sites, blogs, online newspapers and "citizen journalism" at our fingertips, this small-town spat points to a larger question the news industry’s been forced to ask itself for years: just who can be a journalist?
Dan Gillmor, whose book, "We The Media," details the progress and problems of grassroots journalism, seems to argue that anyone with a pen, pair of eyes and an outlet can write the news.

He writes, "…readers, or viewers, or listeners, collectively know more than media professionals do. This is true by definition: they are many, and we are often just one. We need to recognize and use their knowledge. If we don’t, our former audience will bolt when they realize they don't have to settle for half-baked coverage; they can come into the kitchen themselves."

That’s a pretty extreme statement about the future of the news media. In many ways, it seems Gillmor has little faith in the efficacy of the traditional news outlet. But any student who has spent four years studying within the walls of the Missouri School of Journalism might maintain that there are certain standards only a trained journalist — someone who understands communications law, copyright, news value, AP style — can uphold. Anybody can be a source of news. But only professionals can truly be considered journalists. To best understand this, it is important to look at the ways in which citizen journalism's shortcomings can be overcome only with the help of trained professional newspeople.

"More and more, journalism is going to be owned by the audience," master blogger Jeff Jarvis is quoted as saying in Gillmor's book. He says that Internet news will eventually be run and controlled by average citizens — under the guise of writers — who submit pieces of information to the site. But even he makes the caveat that professional journalists will still need to play a large role in the data collection, audience outreach, and fact checking that should take place with every story the public will read.
After all, there’s a certain level of trustworthiness attached to a journalist who comes complete with a degree or at least some standard credentials to report the news. These people are generally better trusted because they have greater access to sources that aren't always easy to get on the record, like senators, or crime victims or CIA officials. This access comes only after a certain level of trust is built, perhaps after a reporter has spent quite a bit of time honing a beat, something a citizen journalist wouldn't necessarily understand how to do. Trust also comes with having one's name attached to a powerful news outlet, or at least a credible, bona fide news outlet that doesn’t have .blogspot,com tacked to the end of it. Gillmor writes, for example, that the Watergate scandal would not have been covered with nearly as much professionalism or tact by a modern blogger as it was by the traditional newspapermen of the time. The same can be said about every story from war to a personality profile of an upcoming mayoral candidate. People with information want to give it to someone they can trust to get it right. Unfortunately for citizen journalists, that trust comes with journalism and reporting experience.

In another portion of the Joplin-area blog, the author writes that the local news media have the credibility and manpower to be the archetypal government watchdog they’re supposed to be, but as with everything else on the blog, the local media have done it wrong. Too frequently, we’re scooped, the blogger writes, and oftentimes it’s him doing the scooping. This post simply points to a dilemma newspapers and television stations face with the emergence of powerful blogs; citizens demand that journalists, with their pride and credibility, continue to be the watchdog on money and power. They also demand they participate in news writing, yet they lack the credibility to take on the government in the way most journalists are trained to do. This is a new form of pressure for newspapers especially, but the media should capitalize on it in order to gain readership and respect. The pressure from citizens to be better watchdogs should be an opportunity to do some serious investigative journalism, something noticeably absent from many newspapers of today. Furthermore, newspapers that see their function in citizens’ lives as on the fritz, should probably remember that their greatest role is one that citizens themselves can never take away from them — the investigative role. Paul Farhi writes in a recent issue of American Journalism Review that professional, trained journalists with powerful newspapers at their backs will still be better at writing in-depth reports and investigative features than bloggers ever will, a caveat Gillmor seems to make as well.

In the same magazine, John Morton writes, "Where do they (bloggers) think the news they endlessly opine, and rail about comes from? It comes from newspapers, no less for bloggers than for most of the news presented on radio and television. Take that away, and all they’ll have left is their opinions."
And indeed, if newspapers are truly headed into the trash pile that is the American opinion media, journalism has a more daunting task ahead of it than the question of who can play the game.

Also, when it comes to reporting the most difficult stories, only trained journalists with the guidance of professional publications have the knack for detail and ethics. Even the smartest citizen reports might naturally overlook some of the biggest flaws within their stories and burn a source, or even worse, they might slip dramatic and false information to the public.
The founder of OhMy news, the first citizen journalism Web site of its kind, and the only one with its stature thus far, writes in Gillmor’s book that OhMy changed the definition of who a reporter is. His conclusion: a reporter is anyone trying to get information to the public. In actuality, that’s just another way of defining what it means to be a source.
OhMy’s definition of "reporter" degrades the hard work and training that professional journalists at the nation’s top newspapers and television stations have undergone to get where they are today. A reporter has some creative writing style to bring to the table, that has been honed by years of schooling and experience. A reporter is also someone who makes long-lasting connections with sources and comes with a notion of objectivity burned firmly in his or her brain. Reporters actively seek news. Sources, on the other hand, submit news. That is how journalism keeps the public part of the process.

The discussion won’t stop, and it shouldn’t. As today’s rookie citizen journalist gains the experience of a long-time newspaperman, modern journalism will have to ask itself the same question again, of who exactly is a journalist. And the more voices that join game, the harder the answer will be to find.
***
Ms. Gurman's piece is undeniably well-written, but to call my comments on the Globe and other local media outlets condescending when she treats bloggers with the same kind of condescension seems a bit self-serving. However, I will charitably write that off to her youth.

Ms. Gurman writes, "Some commenters came to the defense of the local media, saying that newspapers and TV stations do a job this blogger couldn't fathom doing without proper J-school training, reporting skills and effective writing techniques. And then the author makes a rebuttal, which is always something to the effect that when local media fail their readers, anyone can be a journalist." I don't recall ever saying that anyone can be a journalist, though I do believe that anyone can provide valuable information for the public. As for me not being able to fathom doing Ms. Gurman's job without her "J-school training, reporting skills and effective writing techniques," I wish she had used those skills to discover that I was probably working for newspapers before she was born, did so for 22 years and with some success. It is true that I do not have daily access to sources that she and other reporters do, but having the experience to know where to look for information and being able to connect it to other information is also a valuable skill for a reporter to have, and unfortunately, it is one that no J-school, not even the University of Missouri School of Journalism, can teach.

Ms. Gurman also writes, "When it comes to reporting the most difficult stories, only trained journalists with the guidance of professional publications have the knack for detail and ethics." This is probably the reason why we have so many instances of flawed reporting that turn up daily in some of our most highly-respected media outlets.

I share some of Ms. Gurman's thoughts about so-called "citizen journalists." I don't necessarily look at myself in that fashion. I started as a reporter for a small-town newspaper 29 years ago, and seeking the truth is something I have naturally done for the past three decades. Journalism is a wonderful calling, but you do not have to have a J-school degree to do it. Some people who have those degrees are among the worst journalists working today, while some who do not have them rank among the best.