I was reading this story about Willard Beach in Portland this morning and noticed something I hadn't seen before. Underneath the title of the piece is says:
Posted by: Jason Wheeler, Multimedia Journalist.
Hmmm. Multimedia Journalist? Is that even different than a regular ol' journalist these days? I'm assuming Wheeler not only writes stories like a "regular" journalist but that he posts them on the website, perhaps takes photos (though I didn't see one by him on the site), and maybe even posts video on the site...though I didn't see any of that either.
If I went by that definition I guess I'd be a multimedia journalist, too. In fact, I think most journalists I know would be classified as the same -- so I find it kind of funny that a new professional title has been created to attest to our 21st century job duties.
I'm sure most people didn't even notice Wheeler's title, but as a journalist myself it struck me. What AM I really? When people ask me what I do for a living I rarely say that I am a journalist. I usually say I write and edit for a magazine. But I also take photographs, blog, keep up the magazine's presence on Twitter and Facebook, conduct interviews, proofread, post stories to our website, edit photos in photoshop, help create ads, manage our editorial assistant, pick up lunch on occasion, and do the dishes. Heck, I'm not a multimedia journalist...I'm a WIZARD!
What are you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
I've noticed this "multimedia" label becoming more and more a part of job descriptions lately. Journalists tell stories and they are simply using more tools than ever before to tell them, with both positive and negative results. The issue becomes whether the newsrooms requiring journalists to use more tools (simply for the sake of using more tools) leads to the quality of the reporting going down. Back in my reporting days, I would often photograph my stories, which luckily led to my love of photography (many reporters resent their cameras though). Yet spending my time getting images of the subject sometimes meant less time interviewing them (though sometimes you'd get great quotes in that informal chatting during the photographing). Now add audio, video, etc. Learning how to use all these mediums to compliment each other is key, as if I knew I got great art, it would sometimes take the pressure off the writing. But it's important to empower journalists with these tools, rather than make them feel overwhelmed - after all, we are storytellers, not technicians simply out collecting data.
And as an aside, I think my dogs are way cleaner than most kids on the beach :)
well my job title says "producer" but i have the same problem. since i edit, film, write, interview and now i'm in charge of our twitter site. but i still have issues calling myself a journalist, period. since it's not what i studied or dreamed of becoming.
I think we all do a lot of different things in our jobs (many of which are multimedia) but I think sometimes it makes people feel better about a lower salary and cruddy hours to get a better, cooler sounding title.
For example, when I say I have my own online business, people think some combination of web design and eating bonbons all day. ;^)
i hear ya nicole...a snazzier title might make us low payed journalists feel better.
and sam...if journalists can't write..what have they got? nothing. not matter if they can take a photo, edit a video, or post a blog. writing should be their expertise first. everything else is added topping :) lucky for you you CAN do it all!
Post a Comment