Picture
Today I wanted to post a letter to a former student written by Prof. Phill Brooks, one of my mentors. Phill is the director of the Missouri School of Journalism's state government reporting program and he is also the statehouse correspondent for 1120/KMOX. His letter compares the struggle of the journalism profession to religions. I think he addresses a few issues that our profession needs to resolve. Enjoy.
--Sarah

Much of this ongoing discussion about the economic challenges facing journalism has struck me as missing a fundamental distinction between the concepts of profession and of industry.

These discussions about the future of journalism usually are framed within the context of the financial problems and technological issues facing the communications industry.

 Journalism, however, is not an industry.  Our profession transcends market, technology and even medium.  Instead, our profession is defined by a commitment to inform society about the issues of importance.  It is a service to society that has existed throughout much of recorded human history, pursued from many different venues (what we might, today, call industries).  

 If the current industries upon which journalism now functions are failing, then our profession (once again) needs to move elsewhere.  Our primary objective should not be survival of those industries.  We have a quite different calling that is independent of any particular industry, medium or technology.

There is a fascinating parallel for me between the current outside pressures on journalism and the pressures that were faced by some of the world’s greatest belief systems in their formative years.

When early Christians faced persecution during their early years, they did not seek ways to accommodate or to adjust to outside pressures.  They did not negotiate with outsiders who did not respect their beliefs.  Rather, they went underground (sometimes literally) and, among themselves, developed a stronger, collective sense of commitment, meaning, purpose and dedication.

A religious analogy to journalism is more appropriate than it might seem.  Among those of us who have devoted our lives to this profession, we often talk about journalism in religious terms. 

My school's founding dean, Walter Williams, defined journalism with a "creed" in which he repeatedly used the word "believe." A later dean of our school, Jim Atwater, termed his relationship to journalism as a "calling."  

A former associate dean of my school and one of our profession’s leading ethics philosophers, Ed Lambeth, based an entire book on the concept of "commitment" in journalism.  And, among ourselves in the profession, we sometimes refer to "the faith" when talking with each other about our standards and our sense of purpose.

Like early Christians, like early Muslims, like early followers of Buddha and like those of the Jewish faith – we journalists now find our "beliefs," our standards and our practices under question. 

These great religions and philosophies of the world evolved and strengthened during their periods of adversity.  Maybe our profession too could use our period of adversity as an opportunity to define a profession that has meaning through the ages.

Let the institutions of business and communications struggle with how profit-making media companies can maintain their profits, how their industries can better entertain the next generation or how the telecom industries can make bigger profits with their new technologies.

We in the profession of journalism have a different purpose.  And, for the next generation of those who feel this calling to our profession, we need to clearly define what makes our profession different from an industry.
 Prof. Phill Brooks
Director, State Government Reporting Program Missouri Digital News  Missouri School of Journalism
Statehouse Correspondent, KMOX