Journalism is a serious profession, just like being a doctor, or a scientist, or an accountant. We know this, because the journalists themselves tell us so. And even though doctors, scientists, and accountants belong to professional organizations that police their members to ensure that they maintain the highest ethical standards, and journalists don't, who are we to question them?
So you'll understand that not everyone is cut out to be a journalist. You can't just show up at a White House press briefing claiming to be from some news outfit nobody ever heard of, and expect to be taken seriously.
Do you have what it takes to be a Serious Journalist? Take the test beyond the jump, and find out!
- A Republican political operative sends you a hit piece on a Democratic politician that makes a number of serious claims of unethical behavior. What do you do?
A) Carefully research the claims, and if they don't pan out, ignore the story.
B) Simply slap your name on the piece and run it on page 1.
- Democratic congressional leaders announce an important piece of legislation. Polling shows that the legislation is supported by a wide majority of Americans, but Karl Rove tells you confidentially that the legislation is unpopular and will mean trouble for the Democrats at election time. What do you write in your story?
A) You write that polling shows that the legislation is supported by a wide majority of Americans.
B) Citing "a top White House official", you write that the legislation is unpopular and will mean trouble for the Democrats at election time.
C) Citing "Washington insiders say", you write that the legislation is unpopular and will mean trouble for the Democrats at election time.
D) You write that the legislation is unpopular and will mean trouble for the Democrats at election time, without bothering to cite anybody.
- Several conservative pundits simultaneously express outrage at something a Democratic politician recently said. The statement they quote has been taken out of context, and actually means something completely different from what they say it means. What do you do?
A) Write about how conservatives are taking the politician's statement out of context to generate some phony outrage.
B) Write about how outrageous the politician's statement is.
- Matt Drudge runs an unsourced story on his blog about a sex scandal involving a Democratic politician. What do you do?
A) Ignore the story until you get confirmation from at least two credible sources.
B) Run with the story. And I mean, run hard!
- A liberal blog runs a story about a pervasive abuse of power by a government agency, citing stories published in several local newspapers across the country, and linking to public documents available on the internet. What do you do?
A) Investigate the claims yourself, reading the cited stories and the linked document. If the claims are legitimate, run with the story.
B) Ignore the story, because bloggers aren't real journalists.
C) Publicly mock the liberal blogger as a hysterical partisan who is getting upset over nothing.
- Several government officials tell you about a growing military threat from a nation that the Bush administration has been publicly denouncing. None of the officials will allow themselves to be quoted by name, and none of them offers any actual evidence for their claims. What do you do?
A) Ignore them. This is obviously nothing more than an attempt by the Bush administration to manipulate the media.
B) Run the story about the growing military threat, citing "informed sources", because no government official would lie about something as important as national security.
- An important White House official has been convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice. The idea of a presidential pardon for the official is floated. Polling shows that the public overwhelmingly opposes a presidential pardon. You appear on a Sunday morning talk show where you are asked about the possibility of a presidential pardon. What do you say?
A) You point to polls showing that the public overwhelmingly opposes a presidential pardon.
B) You point out that there is a great deal of public support for a presidential pardon.
- A conservative pundit accuses you of having a liberal bias. How do you respond?
A) Point out that it's your job to report the facts, and if the conservative pundit thinks the facts have a liberal bias, he's out of luck, because he's not entitled to his own facts.
B) Assure the conservative pundit that in the future, you'll be sure to write stories that he finds more agreeable.
C) Plead with the conservative pundit not to judge you by all those other liberal journalists, because you're not like that, really, and you'll do anything he says as long as he doesn't say such a terrible thing about you ever again.
SCORING: Give yourself 1 point every time you answered A, two points every time you answered B, 3 points every time you answered C, and 4 points every time you answered D.
RESULTS:
8 to 9 points: Hopeless. Stick to blogging, you loser.
10 to 14 points: Borderline. You need to spend more time attending Washington, D.C. cocktail parties.
15 to 16 points: Good. You've got what it takes to be a Serious Journalist.
17 to 20 points: Excellent. Looks like we've found our newest nationally syndicated columnist!