Dave Kearns

I usually admire the stuff my friend Kim Cameron writes, and his posting on Andrew Keen’s book, The Cult of the Amateur, is mostly right on target. But Kim does repeat that truly awful identifier “citizen journalist.”

All journalists are citizens! I know many journalists, and every single one of them is a citizen of some country – most are US, Canadian or UK citizens, but I’ve known French, Italian, Brazilian and Australian journalists, also.

Most are also professional journalists – they make their living as journalists. Some are non-professional journalists – they make their living doing something else. People who do something for fun, or for the love of it rather than getting paid for it are called “amateurs” or, perhaps, “hobbyists.” (usually “hobbyist” is reserved for those things that no one gets paid to do and the “hobbyist” designation denotes some stature for the individual within that community, though)

I’ve never heard of “citizen golfers” or “citizen painters” or even “citizen politicians” they’re all called amateurs and so should those who practice journalism without a paycheck.

“Amateur” can be a term of derision when used by a professional. It shouldn’t be, and we should think less of the professional who uses the term this way. But torturing the fine word “citizen” to mean something entirely beyond it’s definition is not the answer.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS