"journalists who are routinely putting their lives on the line doing a job they happen to think is a worthwhile and honourable"

Worthwhile, yes.

It's not only their own lives they're putting on the line.

What news organizations owe the fixers they rely on, leave behind in foreign countries | Poynter.

And that's what makes it feel an awful lot like a double standard.

As I said, just a little humility.

Y

What news organizations owe the fixers they rely on, leave behind in foreign countries | Poynter.

The same applies to governments and militaries that employ local interpreters and the like and them leave them hanging in the wind once they pull out. What's your point?

I agree that you can find journalists and news organisations that give the rest a bad name - show me one profession (and I use that term deliberately for the reasons already spelt out) where this isn't true, but as I've repeatedly said, it's lazy and unfair to tar the entire profession (that word again) with the same brush.

If it's humility you want you can start by getting off your high horse...

Arguing about what is a "profession" and what is not is exactly the sort of thing that journos should not be good at.

It's an unnecessary discussion.

As a journalist, your work is out in public every day. Your hits and your misses follow you forever (speaking of which, Cloudster, you must be older than dirt too - was that the occasion where a rowdy GE engine salesman called H***y St******her was being a useful source?).

There may be journos who manage to consistently fake knowing what they are doing, or use style and flash to paper over weak reporting, but they are few and far between.

And, by the way, everyone has to learn. A lot of the impetus behind this thread is from people who haven't quite twigged that, on a Saturday afternoon in August, you're not going to find Woodward, Bernstein and Bob Hoover shooting the breeze in a British newsroom.

To answer a point raised a couple of times in this thread, the standards bodies are here and here, but if you work for the BBC you're much more likely to be eviscerated by the BBC themselves, who have an absolutely terrible habit of falling on their own swords immediately they upset someone important.

Phil R - Worse than that. If you really screw up you end up getting the unmerciful pi55 taken out of you for all to see, in Private Eye.

I've heard it argued that the NYT's Jayson Blair scandal could not have happened in the UK because one of the journos beaten by his "scoops" would have grassed him up to the Eye.

Journalists - Professionals Or Not - Does It Matter?
 

I have come to regret raising this line of argument early on in this thread. It hasn't really contributed much light.

Although I stick solidly to what I said in my original post (21st August), it is really no more than a side issue in the current context. Whether or not the adjective 'professional' can legitmately be applied, the point we set out to review here is whether individual journalists are doing a sound job in reporting, particularly on aviation matters.

Unsurprisingly, some are and some aren't, as in all journalism (and any other area of activity). There has been some first rate stuff recently from people on the ground in Tripoli, for example (as well as some rubbish from others). As I also said in another post (22nd August 12.02), 'So what?' Even if we can agree on our "100 worst/best" list, that would serve no real purpose other than to get it off our collective chest. So perhaps this thread is due for burial?

As to why I aired the 'professional?' argument in the first place, that's another matter. I intended to draw attention to the arrogance of a few second-raters in claiming such status, and to the fact that the penalties for being wrong are different. I accept the argument from some of the eminent contributors here that poor journalism doesn't always escape unscathed, but being bashed in Private Eye isn't quite the same as losing your livelihood.

I finish by repeating what I said before: PPruners as a community are especially sensitive to mishandled, misrepresented stories about flying, but I have first hand knowledge of exactly the same effect in other fields . . . Let's just trust in the basic common sense of (most of) our fellow citizens, take a couple of deep breaths, and enjoy the knowledge that people like Red 4 have done a great deal more good in the world than can be undone by bad reporting.

Blazing Body
 

I remember the fury which went through our squadron when a journo,
Geof Garret, published a photo of Laurie Davis's body fire in a gutter
after a Canberra 9 crash

We complained to the Daily Mail but they said is was legit news. He published again in the Am Phot'r

We angry again but no good. Many years later they wanted a report on my helo crash in Russia. Two words

When the press really annoy, you never forget or forgive