Comments on: Journalism: a trade, not a profession

By: Greg Watts

Greg Watts — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 09:20:33 +0000

An interesting piece.

By: jason brown

jason brown — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:18:27 +0000

. . .

Important point.

Journos are lectured frequently to be “professional” but resist formalisation because of feared impacts on freedoms of speech.

Such as the state limiting access to professional, registered journalists. So forth, name your trickiness.

Perhaps by recognising journalism as a trade, focus can be taken away from uni style processes and towards the craft itself – the writing of articles that follow, ahem, professional rules?

. . .

By: Bill Bennett

Bill Bennett — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 06:07:45 +0000

Well journalism always used to be considered a trade – as recently as the early 1970s in the UK. By the time I signed on in 1980 it was starting to attract graduates and toffs but that was considered a recent development.

By: Martin Cloake

Martin Cloake — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 07:58:34 +0000

Said this for years – and it infuriates middle class types who wrongly think a trade is to be looked down upon. But the facts are plain – it’s a trade for the reasons outlined here.

One thing though, it’s wrong to think a trade cannot have the same, or even greater, levels of skill as a profession. Look at the history of various trades just in this country for proof

By: Soilman

Soilman — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 +0000

How true. But it’s worse; even considered as a trade, journalism does badly compared with the competition. Most hacks earn less than the guys who plumb their bathroom and fix their roof. About the only tradesmen we can safely look down on are the ones who empty our bins.

And even they’re catching up.