SPJ President Seems to Support Certification for Pro Journalists

In a blog entry, Society of Professional Journalists president Christine Tatum writes about whether journalists should need certification. If you read the post, she never exactly says that there should be mandatory registration, but given the tone and the points she makes, it certainly sounds as though she supports the concept:

I know. I know. Journalism is a trade, not a profession. But if journalists who are formally trained and who make their primary living by working in the news business are going to differentiate themselves from the rapidly rising number of truly irresponsible hacks out there (who are, arguably journalists) and retain the public's trust, they need to give "professionalization" some serious thought.

she quotes at length - and apparently, by her admission, without asking permission - over 800 words from a book written by her former ethics professor, Philip Meyer. Here is one of the key paragraphs:

"Journalism schools are already under pressure to provide midcareer training so that those who graduated before the computer's use became so common feel less disadvantaged in comparison to new, computer-ready graduates. A certification program would be a logical part of a midcareer training program. And both the schools and the midcareer students should be comfortable with it since a journalism degree is itself a form of certification. So, for that matter, is a passing grade in any specific skills course.

And then Meyer asks, "Who will step up and volunteer (to devise certification programs)? Specialists in fields that are easy to define but hard to learn would make good candidates." Why do I get the feeling that Tatum would suggest SJP as a logical candidate.

Given SPJ's support of publisher National Geographic, I have to wonder whether this stand is another way of trying to ensure the future of staff journalists and to keep out the hoi polloi, including all those unwashed freelance writers.