Why It's Time to Retire the Term "Citizen Journalist"

Today's Los Angeles Times profiles Mayhill Fowler, the Huffington Post blogger and "citizen journalist" who got Bill Clinton to go postal on Vanity Fair's Todd Purdum. The LAT buries the lede, though, in not noting until the 14th paragraph that Fowler's question to Clinton was "What do you think of that hatchet job somebody did on you in Vanity Fair?"

I'm not going to go all "I have 25 years experience as a reporter" on you here, but I do want to point out one thing: Getting Bill Clinton to go nuts over somebody writing unkindly about him, and doing it by waving the red-flag words "hatchet job" in his face, isn't called "journalism." It's called "poking the bear," and any sentient being with a digital voice recorder can do it if he or she can get within shouting range of the notoriously cranky ex-president.

To be fair, it isn't clear from the Times piece whether Fowler describes herself as a "citizen journalist," or if that's the paper's choice of words. What is clear is that the term has become widely used on CNN and elsewhere, that it's now broadly current, and that it's an affront to people who practice the craft and the profession of journalism... a profession that ought not to include fish-in-a-barrel tactics like ambushing the world's most famous hothead, needling him until he snaps and then posting the audio with an accompanying note that says, more or less, Hey, everybody. Look what I just did!

You can call Fowler's brush with Clinton anything you like. Call it "Participatory citizenship" or "On-scene audio-visual blogging." You can call it "Midge," for all I care. But "journalism" it ain't. And journalists, like the ones at the LA Times, should know better.

Cross-posted at billbarol.tumblr.com.

Comments

[Slaughter]

Barol's exactly right. Using the term "hatchet job" when she could have said "article" was out of bounds. And she said "somebody" wrote? She couldn't even remember the author's name?

[presto]

If the job of a journalist is to lob softball questions in order to give the respondent a platform, then you are probably right. But if that is the case, we the public should be encouraging "citizen journalists" to cover specific QA events. For example, it would have been nice to have one in the crowd during Obama's press conference following his Trinity resignation. Then perhaps the questions we were all shouting at the TV would have been asked.

Similarly, with the citizen journalist's propensity to just print what they hear in an unedited what-you-see-is-what you get fashion, we get treated to more reality and less bloated analysis. Bill Clinton has enough political sophistication to have avoided that dust-up so presumably he wanted to get his rant out there. He appropriately apologized but we know now what he thinks. Obama might not have had quite enough political sophistication to have avoided making the "bitter" remarks to what he thought was a private gathering. He has it now. That taught us something as well.

Amateur citizen journalism sounds like what the press used to be before it married the boss's daughter.

[Piatt]

I enjoy her work. Bubba could have kept his mouth shut or refused to comment. As we know by now, these are apparently not options for him.

[QD]

I don't think the label matters as much as the complete absence of good journalistic technique. There have certainly been professional journalists who behaved just as poorly. It is is worth noting that this is the same "journalist" who made a big deal out of Obama's "bitter" comment. I wouldn't call her a "Citizen Journalist" I would just call her a muckraker.

[26eaj24]

Agreed. Sneaking into a private fundraiser with a concealed tape recorder does not make you a "journalist". Her technique is slimy and sleazy.

[larry278]

Till somebody coins a better term, 'citizen journalst' is current web-speak, etc. Live with it.

[M.S. Bellows, Jr. - Huffpost Blogger]

See M.S. Bellows, Jr.'s Profile

Maybe there's a distinction now, as there wasn't until at least the mid-20th century, between journalists and the Fourth Estate. No "member of the press" at any time between Ben Franklin and Tom Paine in the late 1700s through the Muckrakers in the early 1900s subscribed to the "journalistic ethics" that modern journalists pride themselves on -- and it was that wide-open style that the Founders had in mind when they embraced the concept of "the marketplace of ideas", and that the Supremes were talking about when they ruled against prior restraints. There's a critical need for responsible, cautious, polite, access journalism, but frankly, what Mayhill's been doing is what the Founders were thinking of when they drafter the First Amendment.

So Mayhill isn't a "citizen journalist." She is "the press", though, and should be respected for what she does, because it's exactly what someone -- if not the AP -- is supposed to be doing.

[Sumocat]

Oh please. By your elitist logic, there's no such thing as professional journalism, only Journalism. The truth, if you were interested in that, is "journalism" is a general term that is sub-divided into different genres, styles, and levels of quality, much like every other profession. Citizen journalism, gonzo journalism, photojournalism, yellow journalism, they're all types of journalism, regardless of whether they meet professional standards. Journalism is not an all-or-nothing endeavor, regardless of what the elite decide. Of course, the elite did determine that children's books don't really qualify as books, hence the latest Harry Potter books were not New York Times Bestsellers, so maybe they can apply that standard to journalism too.

[Pocho]

Hey we can do anything we want. We are Americans. That's what my teacher told to me. Why be surprised when idiots act like how they've been trained, display what they are, and how the world has come to grieve their existence.

[LittleBrother]

"it's an affront to people who practice the craft and the profession of journalism... a profession that ought not to include fish-in-a-barrel tactics like ambushing the world's most famous hothead..."
__________________________________________________________

Well, I take your point, and I agree with it as far as it goes. But I also can't help adding that "the craft and profession of journalism" also ought not to include Judith Miller, Michael Gordon, Fred Hiatt, Joe Klein, and several thousand other benighted, bought-and-paid-for hacks and mountebanks who are even more reprehensible than sensationalistic provocateurs and rank amateurs.

"Citizen journalists" may not be part of the solution, but thanks to journalism being largely absorbed by corporate media, the profession is far too top-heavy with infotainwhores.

[Gma11]

Journalism it ain't.

Agreed.

Fowler is an ethically-challenged individual.