Brickie, seamstress or lawyer?

Is journalism a trade, craft or profession?

The resounding response from the Seminar C presenters was that journalism can't be explicitly defined.

Melissa said that she believes "journalism resists categorisation (and that) it all depends on who you talk to". She quoted Oscar Wilde as saying he thought of journalism as "work", thus implying its categorisation as a trade.

The public have an insatiable curiosity to know everything. Except what is worth knowing. Journalism, conscious of this, and having tradesman-like habits, supplies their demands.
--Oscar Wilde

A trade refers to something that can be learned over a period of time, like through an apprenticeship or cadetship. Indeed these are ways that many senior journalists originally found their feet, but few modern-day newsroom rookies are allowed to walk through the door not clutching a degree.

Brad explored the idea of journalism as a profession. Does the requirement of education, primarily tertiary-based, and some element of special knowledge put journalists up there with doctors and lawyers? Journalists certainly don't enjoy the same legal privileges as their supposed counterparts.

Brad raised other similarities between journalists and other professional occupations. The office setting of the majority of an average journalist's day does not lend itself to commonality with a day in the life of a bricklayer. The provision of a "service" also gives a professional element to journalism. Is "news" a service or a tangible good? I think modern news is more like a service - journalists are providing snippets of information on radio, television and online.

To me, I see old-school newspaper journalism as a trade. In the golden days of the newspapers, journalists had the resources to get their hands dirty providing newspaper exclusives, a product of extensively researched investigative journalism.

News now has become something that you cop a quick hit of - instead of luxuriating with long newspaper articles and a cup of tea, we are more likely to see a news update on TV on the way out the door, a comment on the radio and a headline on an internet news site. I think this has given support to the news as service argument, thus also the argument for journalist as professional.

The concept of the citizen journalist however throws a big spanner in this notion. They are still providing a service, just not a professional one. I'll use the practice of medicine as an example:

Professional - GP, surgeon etc, fully qualified. You know you'll get proper, traditional care, in accordance with fairly standardised education & training methods. Same goes for a professional journalist. Ideally, they'll provide thoroughly researched, well-written balanced, articles.

Alternative - Aromatherapy consultant, etc. The practitioner has undergone some sort of training but is not necessarily required to meet any particular standards. This can be likened to some sorts of citizen journalists. They may provide accurate information and valued opinions, but have not received official training as a journalist or use alternative methods to distribute their comments.

Just Plain Dodgy - Malpractice suit anyone? This is for bloggers who can't spell and mainly write about what they fed their dog for breakfast. To me, that's not journalism, let alone anything resembling a trade, a craft or a profession.

As Melissa said, it all depends who you talk to.