Defining "journalist" - enough already
The head of a press organization who I have long respect for has forwarded to me Leonard Pitts' latest rant about "citizen journalists."
In summary, Pitts argues that the antics of James O'Keefe, the conservative activist whose highly edited videos brought about the fall of the communty activist group ACORN, are hardly journalism even though some folks call them so. The column apparently was provoked by O'Keefe's latest exploit to, as CNN put it, "punk" one of its reporters.
(Though, as an aside, does it strike you as it did me that it seems like a whole lot of pixels are being spilled over not very much? Get a grip, CNN.)
Pitts is on solid ground in debating whether a specific person's actions, or even a specific action, is "journalism." But where he goes off the rails, as so many of these rants do, is by then trying to extrapolate to an overall rant about whether there is even such a thing as "citizen journalism." A taste of his argument:
Labels: citizen journalism