On Tuesday, Andrew Nacin dropped my name as someone who falls on the yes-you-should-learn-programming-end-of-the-spectrum. While I appreciate Nacin’s mentioning me as a “living case study,” I do not think it’s necessary for today’s journalist to learn to program.

Before I explain why, let’s look at reasons you should learn to program. First, as MediaShift alludes to, we don’t really know what the media landscape will look like in 10 years. Is it possible that some level of programming will be folded into the standard responsibilities of the average journalist by that point? Maybe, though I doubt it. Second, it may provide you new career opportunities. Plenty of news organizations are starting to experiment with heaps of data and geo-location and the like, and being able to think journalistically while sifting through gigabytes of information may be your ticket to a cool new gig. And of course, the proverbial “why not?” reasoning. If you want to use your time to learn PHP or Ruby (or the WordPress Loop), be my guest. Just recognize it’s not for everyone.

Those points notwithstanding, programming simply is not a necessary (or useful) skill for today’s average journalist. Notice I did not say that programming is not a useful skill on its own; of course it is. The fact is, however, that programming requires too much time and energy to learn, while not providing an outlet for journalists to regularly use the knowledge. Sure, Brian Boyer and Matt Waite are make their living building awesome news applications. It’s just that not everyone can grow up to be them. The cops beat reporter in any city, USA should be cultivating sources, traversing the city, exposing corruption, and producing front page stories (and multimedia packages, maybe!), and that takes time and effort. For the good of the public and the reporter, these goals should trump those of learning to program.

Sure, that cops reporter could have a great idea for web application that automatically maps a location on a landing page when the local police or fire department tweets about an incident. But rather than having to build it all by him or herself, that’s a project to be tackled in conjunction with a dedicated developer. Those guys with the snarky T-shirts and binary jokes? Give them something to do. No need to steal their jobs. In this era of multitasking and convergence, it seems like people (and especially young journalists) are encouraged to learn how to do everything, and while initiative is good, that’s the wrong sentiment. Writers will produce the best written word, photographers will snap the best pictures, and programmers will build the best apps. That’s not going to change, so don’t give up being awesome at something so you can be insufficient at a lot of things.*

In short, if you want to be a programmer and build things, learn to program. If you want your byline on A1 tomorrow morning, focus on getting better at what it is you really want to do.

*Yes, with layoffs and the like, sometimes you will have to be the reporter and the photographer. But, that only works if you’re good enough to tackle both responsibilities, and you might not be if you spread yourself too thin with extraneous forays into too many sectors of the media industry.

Used under a Creative Commoms license via Gary Hayes

That was the question du jour at the Poynter chat I attended today. I hadn’t participated in one before today, but when I heard about it (via Twitter, of course), it seemed like it’d be a gathering of the top young minds talking about Twitter, Facebook, and the like. It was.

There were plenty of good points made, but guest host Greg Linch had an interesting answer to the one question I asked: With Twitter taking over as the premier social network, how can you still use Facebook to your benefit?

Says Greg:

I think Facebook is still very relevant, but for different reasons. I don’t find it nearly as useful as Twitter on a day-to-day basis, but I think it’s an important long-term tool for keeping in touch with friends and longer-form communication.

A good point indeed. Facebook is the primary way I keep in touch with friends from across the country, and my Twitter habits are much more professionally-based. It does beg the question, though: If Facebook is more of a personal-life app, then what’s the point of a newspaper (or other company) having a fan page? I get my news via Twitter/RSS – an additional redundancy seems a little much.

As for how much is too much, I gotta think it varies person to person. If it distracts you or in any way prevents you from accomplishing your goals in the analog world, then it’s no good. But used as a proper digital tool, it should actually be a boost for professional/personal productivity and advancement. Agreed?