“He who knows not and knows not that he knows not, is a fool; shun him.
He who knows not, and knows that he knows not, is a student; teach him.
He who knows, and knows not that he knows, is asleep; wake him.
He who knows, and knows that he knows, is wise; follow him.”
This ancient Arabian saying seems to capture the essence of what complicates the issue of whether the vloggers and bloggers in social media should be legitimatized alongside journalists and traditional media practitioners in the new and emerging mass media. There is a fear to mix the fools and the wise, and the students and the asleep, which are found in both camps.
Yes, there are very legitimate, highly educated, and intelligent writers and content creators, who, for lack of some traditional affiliation and media institution, are mere vloggers and bloggers. And surely, there are anonymous attack dogs and highly opinionated virtual personalities whose only reason for being is their self-professed freedom of speech, which in their limited understanding is an absolute right. They are called by many names. Vloggers, bloggers, influencers, content creators, or to some, trolls.
On the other hand, there are highly intelligent journalists and media practitioners, who, by education and training, are great advocates and competent vanguards of truth and who make their media institutions an essential pillar of democracy, history, and humanity. And surely there are also crooked elements in the media who co-exist mutually with corruption and other social evils. They feed on, either, where corruption is in the system, or where corruption is the system. And by institutional affiliation, they are classified as journalists, or carrying an identification card tagged as “media.”
In the modern society where social media has become the new media of anyone for everyone, the traditional media needs to clarify its role, not only to the society for which they exist, but to itself so it can revisit its emerging role in the times when the noise they make may become a whisper in the wilderness of social dynamics. And when the traditional media enters the realm of social media’s virtual space, its traditional nature, synonymous with the professional essence of the traditional media, fades in the eyes of the public that may not anymore know how to draw the line. The needs, preferences, tastes, and ethics of the public shift at their own choice, and advertising, even political supports, follow.
On professionalizing journalists
The State creates professionals to ensure the safety of the public they serve. The practice of doctors who heal, engineers who build, nurses who care, teachers who teach, etc., is governed by professional standards of practice. In doing so, the State also prohibits and penalizes the practice of the profession by just anyone, regardless of how competent the person is, without the privilege of being a professional. And experience, affiliation, and “competence” alone do not make a professional.
The professionals in our society are existing under the regulated practice from education, licensure, organization, and continuing lifelong learning. The journey to being a professional begins with a degree through a curriculum executed by government-accredited higher education institution. Upon academic completion, a graduate takes a well-established licensure examination by a board of professional experts from the field of practice. A professional is granted a credential, which is a privilege (not a right) to qualify and practice the professional upon demonstration of a set of competencies that render such service safe for the public that the State is protecting in the entire process. Autonomous practice is granted upon the professional subject to administrative, civil, and criminal liabilities, which may cause the professional to lose the license, pay damages, or be imprisoned. Continuing professional education is mandated for the renewal of a professional license every three years, a proof that the public remains safe in the hands of a professional.
In some degree, the professional practice is self-regulated but supervised by the State. This is demonstrated by the professional organization nominating, from its rank, the members of a Regulatory Board that is given executive, legislative, and quasi-judicial power to oversee the practice of the professionals based on pre-set standards of practice under its supervision. In the case of the Philippines, the Professional Regulation Commission is created and mandated by law to supervise 46 regulated professions in the country. In the case of the lawyers, the Supreme Court gives the Bar Examination. The Civil Service Commission conducts examinations for eligibility in government service.
In journalism, it is different. There are various academic preparations and trainings for its practice. It is self-regulated at the level of the media agency, which for its own purpose and intent impose standards, values, ethics, and practices. For sustainability purposes, advertising support fuels the media entities’ operation. There are laws that regulate ownership, registration, and operations of these media agencies. Journalists are also governed by laws for their administrative, civil, and criminal liabilities. There are also accreditation agencies and organizations where the media practitioners, journalists and media entities belong.
Furthermore, there are professional best practices, codes of ethics, and standards that journalists and media practitioners follow, as imposed by their personal choices, organizational norms, and organizational culture.
Are journalists and media practitioners’ practice worthy of being classified as a profession, which the State may need to regulate and regard similar to the professions that define licensed doctors, engineers, nurses, teachers, and others?
In professionalizing the discipline, we are able to separate the fool, the student, the asleep and the wise. In clearly defining the professional nature of a discipline, the profession and the State are able to protect not only the public that professionals serve but also the profession itself to exclude those who do not belong to the circle as licensed and registered practitioner of the discipline. In the early dawn of every profession, there were disruptions and quandaries, which creatively prompted some social order. The professional stature separates the doctors even from the trusted quacks, the engineers from the efficient foremen, the nurses from the caring nanny, the teachers from anyone else who can teach, and more.
Will journalism take the same path to separate itself from the bloggers and vloggers that have exponentially outnumbered them in social media and in the infinite digital space? Will licensed professionalism in media practice separate, or at least classify, practitioners? Is the interest of the general public threatened enough to prompt the government and the best practitioners in media and journalism to come together and agree on some terms not to regulate, necessarily, but to put some social order in this disrupted practice of public communication or mass media? Will professionalism in the practice of journalism and media shun the fool, teach the student, awaken the asleep, and follow the wise?
Only time, the media, and the State can tell.
For feedback, please send e-mail to drcarlbalita@yahoo.com.