Besides writing an award-winning piece that gained national recognition and awards, Michael Berens and Ken Armstrong decided to give back. They took their $10,000 prize money and paid for IRE training for their colleagues at The Seattle Times.
Horvit quotes Manny Garcia, the IRE Board President, “Mike and Ken have always been unselfish with their time and talent,” Garcia said. “They both exemplify what IRE is all about: equipping and training journalists world-wide to produce important investigative work. It speaks to their character and the quality news organization that is The Seattle Times.”
According to Horvit’s article, these two men are the second major award winners to do this sort of philanthropic work in the last few years.
This is important news to include these days. Why? The news about the news doesn’t always have to be critical, or negative or controversial. Gestures like this will keep journalism moving forward, steadily toward improvement. Reporting, writing and investigating are skills that can always be improved upon. I’ve re-discovered that just by keeping this blog. These two men, decided to invest in the important work that investigative journalists do every day. Honing their skills, and now making that practice available to others in the business through this training, is invaluable to the industry.
Journalism is not only learning about what we report, but how and why we report.
There is a quote by Thomas Griffith, a former editor for Time, Inc., “Journalism is in fact history on the run.” That would be something difficult to chase without the necessary skills. Berens and Armstrong are setting a good example in this industry and they are providing those skills to their fellow staffers. Kudos to them.
- Two Seattle publications win Pulitzer Prizes (bizjournals.com)
- 2012 Pulitzer Prize Winners (themoderatevoice.com)
- 2012 Pulitzer Prize winners announced (twitchy.com)
- 2012 Pulitzer Prize winners for Journalism announced (economy4abc.blogspot.com)
Watling writes, “Alan Greenblatt explains in his story today that increasingly, government officials are asking him to prove his official journalist status before granting him interviews. Tides have turned and now it’s not just the reporter doing background research, but the sources are backgrounding the reporters.”
Greenblatt is a correspondent for NPR.org, and wrote about his recent experience of being asked to prove he is a journalist.
In her blog post, Watling brings up some very interesting points, she writes:
- What type of proof is enough?
- What if you’re not working for an agency that hands out press badges?
- What’s stopping you from printing up your own press badge and business cards?
- It’s not like you apply for a license to be a journalist and can hand out your license number to verify with the state, as electricians or plumbers do. (I hope nobody gets any bright ideas.)
- And it’s not like medical professions where you need a certain degree and set of training to perform the job; you simply do not need a degree in journalism to prove you know how to ask who, what, when, where, why and how, and then write it up accurately.
- Plenty of good reporters didn’t learn those skills in the classroom.
- And plenty of bad reporters have a degree but still didn’t learn to apply those skills well.
I happen to agree with her. Watling also mentions the recent court case involving a blogger, the judge ruled the blogger was not a journalist. So how is it determined that someone is a journalist? According to the judge mentioned in Watling’s article, it would be someone who followed these guidelines:
“Defendant fails to bring forth any evidence suggestive of her status as a journalist. For example, there is no evidence of (1) any education in journalism; (2) any credentials or proof of any affiliation with any recognized news entity; (3) proof of adherence to journalistic standards such as editing, fact-checking, or disclosures of conflicts of interest; (4) keeping notes of conversations and interviews conducted; (5) mutual understanding or agreement of confidentiality between the defendant and his/her sources; (6) creation of an independent product rather than assembling writings and postings of others; or (7) contacting “the other side” to get both sides of a story. Without evidence of this nature, defendant is not “media.””
You can read the opinion of the court here.
Currently, the only things I have to show someone who questions my validity as a journalist is, my diploma, my business card and my Society of Professional Journalists card. (Needless to say I don’t carry my diploma with me.) So what if I fall into one or more of the categories she lists above?
I also shiver at the idea that an institution for licensing journalists could be created. Since when do we need a license to practice our basic freedoms, like speech and the press?
Watling also states, “Fortunately for me, as a working journalist and blogger, I can check off each of these seven in some way and when appropriate (i.e. I’m not going on background on most stories, and sometimes my blog posts are just an aggregation of pieces I think people should read). Whew. But what if you didn’t attend journalism school (No. 1)? What if you’re an opinion columnist/blogger whose job it is to be one-sided (No. 7)? What if your job includes curating a mass of content into a product that helps pull together a story from disparate sources (No. 6)? What if you’ve never been affiliated with a MSM news agency but instead set up your own news outlet (No. 2)?”
I’m not sure there is a simple answer here. Of course following the ethics of journalism and knowing the laws associated with the press are two very important things among many others, but there are loopholes. I agree with Watling, that it’s a kind of “New Media vs. News Media“, and all of this New Media is blurring the lines. There are a lot of great aspects of citizen journalism, but also some negative ones. Fact-checking and verification of sources etc, are both very important in journalism. I’m afraid much of that is lost on many “citizen journalists”. Yet still, there are a lot of “citizen journalists” out there that bring to light information and news that might otherwise be lost on the larger media groups.
This is a fascinating area for discussion. While many legacy news organizations struggle to find their footing in this digital age, there are other, newer organizations bursting onto the scene. How this plays out in the future, and what develops as the definition of a journalist or journalism will be something to watch.
This isn’t a winner-takes-all situation. I think there is plenty of playing room on the field.
- Figure out if Old Journalism Ethics Apply to Social Media, Eat Free Pizza, Earn Extra Credit! (nicolekraftosu.wordpress.com)
- Pulitzer Prize Ends Blogger vs. Journalist Debate (bigthink.com)
- Real Journalist Ignores Future of Many Real Journalists (arnoldit.com)
- Should News Bloggers be Considered Journalists? (newmediarockstars.com)