Warning: I am an apprehensive blogger. I have commitment issues; I have never maintained a diary, my sea monkeys always die and I will probably be wicked old spinster in fifty years. I apologise as JOUR1111 has inflicted my insipid life into not only a blog, but the twittersphere.
I am a self confessed couch potato. I am lazy and generally unmotivated. As the large the Schonnel Theatre chairs comfortably molded around me in my first lecture I was pleasantly delighted by the course philosophy which flashed on the screen before me, you are the journalist. This made me feel satisfied with my subject selection: I had not even endured a whole lecture yet and I felt qualified.
It was only as our lecturer, Dr. Bruce Redmen commenced discussing our course outline that I became distracted upon what my new qualification as a journalist truly meant. According to good old Dictionary.com, a journalist is a person who writes about factual events for a living. Today’s technologically savvy society creates ample opportunity for open expression, regardless of qualification. Voices which previously have been silenced in society are reaching an audience! Which leaves me with the question, just because people in society have the ability to be a citizen journalist, should they?