Who has the right to define what a journalist is? (1)

The president of the Association of the Press of Madrid, María Rey, made statements in Congress calling for politicians to “stop defining what a journalist is”. She adds: “We know what we are”. Are you sure? Rey's words, who is also a presenter for a Telemadrid magazine –ahem–, come just as agitator Vito Quiles has just staged another of his stunts, harassing Pedro Sánchez's wife. His clique, including sectors of the PP that feed him –the same PP that governs Telemadrid, ahem ahem–, try to wrap these types of actions in the flag of journalism to gain legitimacy. Rey does not explicitly mention Quiles, but the coincidence in timing makes it difficult not to interpret her statements in the lower house as an attempt to leave the guy alone.

To the illustrious president of the APM I would say: okay, indeed it is not a good idea for politicians to determine what is and what is not journalism, because in the definition –and especially with the consequences that then derive from it– there can be the seed of censorship and informational control. However, we must be brave from the profession and make it clear that not everything that calls itself journalism is. Acting like a scoundrel chasing people to assault them, for example, is not, and it doesn't magically become so because you take out your phone and record it. I don't want Pedro Sánchez (or Feijóo or Abascal) to define what journalism is, but even less do I want the Quileses of the world and their ilk to do so. Simply put, we do not practice the same activity nor are we governed by a common professional code of ethics. For this reason, press associations –hello, Catalan Journalists' Association– have an uncomfortable, but necessary, debate to have about who is a journalist and, above all, who is not. Tomorrow in "Pareu Màquines" I will present some considerations.