Editing: an obsolete profession?!

City University of New York professor Jeff Jarvis poses the question in his latest blog post in the Guardian, "Are editors a luxury we can do without?" An odd question when you consider Jarvis is an editor himself. I have to admit I read the article out of sheer disgust that someone in his profession would even consider the topic worthy of discussion. To my dismay, Jarvis puts forth several valid arguments that would make even the staunchest of supporters stop to question the role of today's editor.

Jarvis points out that as Web sites become more and more the preferred medium for news and information, the role of the editor has become diluted. Many readers skip over the painstakingly produced front page by simply searching for a certain subject and going straight to the article, making the effort put into the layout of a page a fruitless endeavor. Another point is that articles, and especially blogs, that make a place for audience comments to be displayed, are minimizing the need for editors as fact-finders, as the audience now has become the medium for correction.

Thankfully, Jarvis is not jockeying for the end of the editing profession. What he suggests is that the role of the editor is re-evaluated in the changing face of journalism. Instead of spending valuable time on layout design and fact checking, the editor should now become an educator of new technologies in the field. Also, they should spend as much time as possible surfing the web for strong, solid sources of information in order to connect their journalists with the best resources, regardless of the subject matter. Instead of moving editors into extinction, Jarvis advocates for a move into a less demanding, more supportive position, something I think some editors might welcome as a refreshing break.