What's In a Name?

Ever since I started studying, and later participating, in journalism & other communications I've had this suspicious feeling that the advent of blogging would lead to a creative destruction in the communications arena. Don't worry, I'm not an evangel of the market like so many of my GOP counterparts, but those of us in this arena need to face a simple fact. There's no oversight or regulation in this profession, thus subjecting us to more pure market forces. Don't think of this market in terms of many, but rather in terms of the varying qualities of information offered from the Grey Old Lady at the top down to the Lowly Underlings like me.

Right now, the market is doing what markets do -- sifting itself out. This gives us the status quo right now, "easy entry and access" translates into a veritable information chaos. This chaos is both good and bad, and probably results in more information being in the info-market than there would otherwise be. The thing of it is, I'm not really all that sure if legally classifying or otherwise licensing "journalists" would be a bad thing or detrimental to this benevolent chaos. There's been many a time when I've thought that the profession was in need of a more agreed upon set of standards, practices, and ethics; though admittedly, I've looked only at the more reform, progressive angles of that than the limiting standards that more likely would be applied.
What do you all think?

The story below is what provoked these thoughts from me. Of course I believe that all sources should have the safety of protection, but I wonder if leaving bloggers out of the loop could cause a backlash. Or is the blogosphere more like a butterfly market -- once touched it never gets up off the ground again.

Seriously, get back to me on this. I want input, please : - )

Shield Law Sponsor: Bloggers 'Probably Not' Considered Journos By Mark Fitzgerald Published: October 10, 2005 4:17 PM ET INDIANAPOLISBloggers would "probably not" be considered journalists under the proposed federal shield law, the bill's co-sponsor, U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar (R.-Ind.), told the Inter American Press Association (IAPA) Monday afternoon. Lugar emphasized, however, that debate is not yet closed on how to define a journalist under the proposed law. "As to who is a reporter, this will be a subject of debate as this bill goes farther along," he said in response to a question from Washington Post Deputy Managing Editor Milton Coleman. "Are bloggers journalists or some of the commercial businesses that you here would probably not consider real journalists? Probably not, but how do you determine who will be included in this bill?" According to the first draft of the Free Flow of Information Act of 2005, the "covered person" protected by the bill's terms includes "any entity that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or other means and that publishes a newspaper, book, magazine, or other periodical in print or electronic form; operates a radio or television station (or network of such stations), cable system, or satellite carrier, or channel or programming service for any such station, network, system, or carrier; or operates a news agency or wire service." The legislation also covers employees, contractors or other persons who "gathers, edits, photographs, records, prepares, or disseminates news or information for any such entity." A key reason some journalists oppose the popular federal shield proposal is fear that giving Congress the power to define who is and isn't a journalist could lead effectively to the licensing of journalists. In other remarks about the legislation at IAPA's 61st General Assembly, Lugar acknowledged that the legislation could amount to a "privilege" for reporters over other Americans. "I think, very frankly, you can make a case that this is a special boon for reporters, and certainly for their role in freedom of the press," he said. "At the end of the day what we will come out with says there is something privileged about being a reporter, and being able to report on something without being thrown into jail." Lugar said he was inspired to write the legislation by the jailing of New York Times reporter Judith Miller. "I've known Judy Miller for many years," he said, adding that they became close when she was reporting on his efforts to dismantle the former Soviet Union's nuclear arsenal. The bill is necessary to help the United States regain its status as an "exemplar" of press freedom, Lugar told the IAPA. "Even as we are advocating for free press (abroad)... we'd better clean up our own act," Lugar said. Mark Fitzgerald (mfitzgerald@editorandpublisher.com) is E&P's editor-at-large.

Find this article here