JOURNALISTS, professional journalists that is, can often be their own worst enemies - because they use precise terms too carelessly.

The debate about 'citizen journalism' has been clouded and confused as a result, and because too few seem to have stopped to try to identify different practices and people.

This is an attempt to clarify through classification. It is not a final word on the subject. It does not provide dictionary definitions, but it does attempt some demarcation of different views and approaches.

It is also an attempt to provide a political and historial perspective which may provide some context for a complex and passionate debate.

Defining journalism
A student journalist recently asked me how I defined journalism. It was a difficult question that caught me by surprise.

My immediate reaction was that a journalist was someone preparing material for publication, reporting what was going on, but also trying to provide a perspective for such events.

It wasn't ideal, but it was a start. It was largely influenced by Peter Steffens, a Reuters veteran and journalist-turned-academic from the University of Washington, who advocates context as being a large part of a journalist's approach.

I also now regard 'journalism' as being something that an individual does as their prime source of employment or income, using skills such as researching, interviewing, writing, editing, taking photographs, shooting video, or recording sound, which they, or someone else, then edits and 're-presents' for publication.

'Proper' or 'professional' journalists don't just work when they are lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time when something happens; those people are 'witness contributors' if they see something happening, record, photograph or video that event and then offer their material for publication.

All journalists should be citizens; those who were born and live in the UK are probably subjects too, but that's another constitutional debate, for another time and another place, but not all citizens are journalists.

The state and the media
Much online writing is comment and analysis, rather than reporting. Also, it seems to have become - especially in the United States - a lazy cop-out for greater political activity.

Of course, some will rightly argue that they feel so disenfranchised that whinging online is the only course of action open to them.

I disagree. The media cannot be reclaimed as 'ours' until we reclaim the state and demand proper accountability from those some of us bother to elect to run nation states in our names.

In doing so, we should remember that the 'state' is not the same as 'government'; and that collectively citizens together form 'the state'.

Also, it's probably important to remember also that online material is not as unbiased as some believe. Online material reflects those who have the time and resources to use the internet and upload their work. That population is still disproportionately well-educated and affluent. The digital divide has not vanished yet.

'Citizen journalism'
'Citizen journalism' is, firstly, nothing new. Newspapers were originally created by citizen journalists. The concept was boosted in the 20th century by the arrival of - relatively - cheap photocopying, bringing printing back within the means of many for the first time in decades.

But, fanzines, community newsletters and political activity boomed. The look may have been crude and unsophisticated, with typewritten columns and 'transfer-type' headlines, but this was grassroots journalism and communication.

Many who seem to want to call themselves citizen journalists appear to be more like diarists, in the Pepys mode.

A journalist could be regarded as anyone who keeps a journal, but how many people who keep diaries write them with a view to publication? Of course some do, but technology has meant that it is now as easy and quick to type thoughts into an online blog as it is to write by hand on paper, or keep the file on your own computer.

Even if they don't identify themselves as such, I regard such people as online diarists - and much of their work as self-indulgent 'OD-ing' ….

(And, as Guardian columnist Simon Hoggart has done so well for himself by producing books based on family round-robin Christmastime letters, it's probably time such writings became hoggart annuals; self-indulgent online diaries could then be Daily Hoggarts - or should that be hogwash?

'Witness contributors'
This term was coined by journalists in response to the number of people who sent photographs from mobile phones to media organisations in the last year or so, first after the tsunami of Boxing Day 2004, then the London bombings of July 2005 and finally an oil depot fire in Hertfordshire in December.

Several of those who sent photographs to the BBC in July were later interviewed for a TV documentary about the day. All but one said they did not consider themselves journalists and only took, and sent in, the images because they witnessed the day's events.

Writing about the phenomenon in The Independent, freelance journalist Guy Clapperton agreed.

One of his interviewees, he wrote, 'showed that many citizen journalists are public-spirited newsgatherers with no wish to be anything buy amateur.'

('Newsgathering' itself is a much misused them; for example, many 'newsgatherers' within the BBC are not gathering 'news' per se, but chasers of programme material responding to reports from others, primarily, these days, wire services such as PA and Reuters or the police and fire service voicebanks.)

Perhaps too cruelly, the term 'witless journalists', once ascribed by hard-bitten local paper editors to cub reporters on their first days at work, now refers to those who need protecting from themselves (and that includes some who claim to be professional too, by the way).

Community journalism
Community journalism is evolving too, and, primarily for reasons of cost, moving online.

Communities seem to identify themselves, or we identify ourselves with communities, according to where we are or our interests.

Again, community journalism, primarily unpaid, but frequently aided and abetted by those with professional skills, is nothing new.

Community journalism exists in the mainstream media - in trade publications, academic journals, hobby and pastime magazines - such as Press Gazette, The British Medical Journal, Railway Modeller and Practical Photgraphy - and in weekly newspapers - such as the Axminster Gazette (for the town, rather than carpet makers) or East Anglian Daily Times.

Less formally, community journalism is manifest in parish magazines, community association newsletters, fanzines, and so on. Some are printed, some photocopied and now, many are online. (Not a lot new there, then, Ed.)

Blogging
Blogging takes several forms. Most that originates in the English-speaking world is opinion, criticism, comment and analysis.

Even those who contribute to particular interest websites, covering topics such as travel or restaurants, for example, are submitting criticism.

Personal accounts from areas of political repression, conflict or disaster can add greatly to humanity's collective knowledge and understanding of its own behaviours.

These can change agendas for the 'mainstream' media too. They provide the evidence editors who would not have sanctioned expensive assignments need to change their minds.

Some blogs do report news. Other bloggers are insufficiently transparent about 'where they are coming from'.

And, by early 2006, a trend seemed to be emerging that high-profile bloggers were being taken over by the mainstream. For example, US commentator Andrew Sullivan's blog, one of the first to be recognised as an 'income generator', had, by late January 2006, become part of the Time magazine website.

Blog-culling is an accurate term for harvesting material from blogs, as to cull means to collect, not to kill.

Some 'blogs' are showcases for 'proper' journalists, as they are cheaper and easier to maintain than huge files of photocopied clippings and cuttings.

Others self-publish online because budget cuts mean that trying to sell material to conventional, mainstream media outlets is no longer economically viable.

Online publishing, like producing newsletters, also gives originators more control over their 'moral rights', to make sure that their work is not distorted by newspaper or magazine editors.

Creating material is nothing new. It still takes time and effort, and these usually cost money. Anyone who could wield a pair of scissors and some glue could produce a fanzine. Anyone who can learn basic computer skills can publish online.

The internet has provided a distribution method that is infinitely cheaper than photocopying. Just as photocopied fanzines had to work to establish their credibility, so too must those who distribute their work online.

Radio presenters
Some radio presenters are not, and do not claim to be 'journalists'. Some consider themselves entertainers and belong to Equity, the actors' union, rather than the National Union of Journalists.

Some, who have backgrounds in music radio as disc jockeys, may have discovered talents for asking 'the right question of the right person', but that doesn't make them 'journalists'.

Paparrazi
The growth of 'celebrity' spurred another development in journalism, especially photo-journalism - the emergence of paparazzi.

These photographers, mostly freelances, although some have come together and formed agencies to make the most from selling their work, chase public figures in the hope of taking commercially-valuable pictures of public figures.

Some paparrazi have become famous, or perhaps infamous, themselves. Although their names may not be as familiar as the figures they photograph, their images are. Shots of the Duchess of York sucking the toes of a middle-aged man beside a pool were sold around the world.

But the life isn't all glamour. There are hours of boredom, waiting for something, anything, to happen. And, even then, there's no guarantee that a picture will sell.

And, while there may be thrills, some of the spills can be potentially devastating. For the paparrazi on motor scooters who were following Diana, Princess of Wales, when she was killed in a car crash Paris, the night ended in arrest.

Some writers chase celebs too. In the UK, the Daily Mirror's '3am girls' cover nothing more than London's nightlife.

For freelances, or citizen witnesses, if a valuable story does come along, it's probably more by good luck and chance or hours of dedication, and even then, the cash return might not be that much.

Transparency and cost

Codes of practice and conduct from the National Union of Journalists and the Press Complaints Commission in the UK both stress that fact and opinion should be clearly differentiated.

That several, reasonably similar, forms of expression and publication such as diary-writing and the internet have become more widespread at the same time has led to confusion.

Online material is not produced entirely without cost. Many may not seek financial remuneration for the work - although the number of blogs carrying Google or similar advertisements suggests that some cash return is not to be snubbed.

Even if they don't invest money in their work, online creators are investing time. Clearly online efforts are dominated by those who have, or make, the time to produce such material. (And it can be argued that this alone means that online material is not as balanced as other media.)

Complex conclusions So, in nearly 2,000 words, it's possible to see that 'citizen journalism' covers commentator bloggers, online diarists, eyewitness mobile phone photographers, community journalism, fanzine producers and publicists, and podcasters have not, until now, been mentioned at all.

The term can also cover village correspondents for weekly newspapers, those who produce parish magazines, political pamphlets and newsletters and even the coffee-shop entrepreneurs who saw a need for news-sheets and started to produce them, all those decades ago.

Taxonomy can too easily be toxic, so probably greater clarity in identifying the sub-species of citizen journalist is necessary in taking this debate forward.

I know I'm a citizen, a journalist, an online self-publishing commentator and observer who doesn't keep a diary, although I do occasionally take photographs.

I hope everyone is clearer now.