A journalism professor at my alma mater, the University of Georgia, has decided I need monitoring and regulation.

That seems a little harsh, but I’m not taking it personally. He didn’t actually single me out. Rather, he published an opinion piece in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution yesterday decrying the rise of “citizen journalism,” and declaring that “the news industry should find some way to monitor and regulate this new trend.” Just to make sure readers knew who he was talking about, the professor specifically identified citizen journalists as those who “collect information and pictures with video cameras and cellphones, and distribute words and images over the Internet.”

Yep, that’s me. And a whole bunch of other folks.

Among the cures proposed by the professor — a former NBC correspondent named David Hazinski — there’s this one:

Journalism schools such as mine at the University of Georgia should create mini-courses to certify citizen journalists in proper ethics and procedures, much as volunteer teachers, paramedics and sheriff’s auxiliaries are trained and certified.

Hazinski knows this is a touchy matter.

Journalists generally don’t like any kind of standards or regulation. Many argue that standards could infringe on freedom of the press and journalism shouldn’t be regulated.

But the very integrity of the industry is at risk, he says.

But we have already seen the line between news and entertainment blur enough to destroy significant credibility. Continuing to do nothing as information flow changes will further erode it. Journalism organizations who choose to do nothing may soon find the line between professional and citizen journalism gone as well as the trust of their audiences.

Keep in mind that this call for monitoring, regulation and certification of Internet-based newsgatherers comes from a fellow who would scream like a frightened girl if someone suggested that the mainstream media be subject to the same requirements. And for all his noble talk about the trust of the audience, Hazinski slips right past any discussion of how the MSM brought its woes upon itself. Bloggers didn’t somehow cause professional journalists to blur the line between entertainment and news. Nor did they force the New York Times to carry water for disgraced prosecutor Mike Nifong in its coverage of the Duke lacrosse case, CBS News to credulously accept forged documents as proof of George Bush’s perfidy, or Jayson Blair, Stephen Glass and others to make up stories. The MSM did all that on its own, with no help from anyone else. (And it should be noted that bloggers, in fact, helped expose those journalistic lapses.)

Hazinski clearly wishes his message to be heard as a call for accuracy and professionalism in the ranks of Internet-based journalists. But what it actually sounds like is a shrill demand for a return to the days when news was a monopoly controlled by the self-appointed few.

This entry was posted on Friday, December 14th, 2007 at 1:01 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.