Some would say "it" is just one of the perks of being a journalist. "It" is so commonplace, few question the ethics of "it" any longer.

CBS News' Bob Schieffer does "it" quite openly and his colleagues in the media applaud. Literally.  Most other journalists are more discreet, but no less guilty.

A recent example is Julie Bain, who writes on health for Reader's Digest.  While traveling with her mom not long ago, Julie became worried after her mother complained repeatedly of leg pain.

"Being a health journalist with lots of medical knowledge (although no clinical training), I was worried that she might have developed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), a blood clot in the leg that can block blood flow and cause pain," Julie writes in a September Readers Digest blog post.

 Is it acceptable for financial journalists to take their children to special screenings of soon-to-be-released films, when those children don't have a byline and could never get in if mom or pop weren't a journalist?

Worried, Julie did what any concerned family member might well do, she picked up the phone and called DVT expert Geoffrey Westrich, MD, an orthopedic surgeon at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City, who has published more than 20 studies on DVT prevention.  The good doctor reassured her that mom was ailing with shingles, not DVT.

Would Dr. Westrich have taken Julie's call if Julie were not an influential health journalist?  Perhaps.  Perhaps not.

When Bob Schieffer took the stage earlier this week at the Grand Ole Opry and sang to an appreciative, invitation-only crowd comprised of many journalists in town to cover the Presidential debate, he fulfilled a long-held dream.

"Can I say something I've wanted to say all my life?" Schieffer asked the receptive crowd.  "I'm Bob Schieffer, and I'm proud to be on the Grand Ole Opry!"

Schieffer's performance, sandwiched between country and western stars Trisha Yearwood and Brad Paisley, is an experience that I'm certain many tens of thousands of other Americans would also enjoy.  But they aren't journalists, so they might as well forget it.

Does being a journalist imbue one with the right to accept what is offered strictly by dint of one's chosen profession?  Schieffer was not at the Grand Ole Opry to report a first-person story on singing there.  He is, after all, not CBS's music correspondent.

No, Schieffer used his journalism renown to buy himself an experience with a currency not available to the bulk of his viewers.

Was it okay for Schieffer to accept the invitation to perform when it has nothing to do with his editorial duties, but everything to do with the stature his job affords him?  Is it okay for a restaurant reviewer to use her position to get a hard-to-get table, when she has no plans to review the restaurant?  Is it acceptable for financial journalists to take their children to special screenings of soon-to-be-released films, when those children don't have a byline and could never get in if mom or pop weren't a journalist?

A number of years back, Gina Boyd, a reporter working for me, interviewed Robert Thomson, now managing editor of The Wall Street Journal.  At the time, Robert was the U.S. managing editor of The Financial Times and seen frequently on national television.

Gina asked him if all the television exposure and recognition ever goes to his head.  Robert replied: "I think you have to be careful.  One of the things you learn in Australia is to take the piss out of yourself.  You have to be self-effacing.  Or otherwise, you lose your way.  And if you don't have your bearings, in whatever you do, you won't do it well."

Well, I don't know whether Bob Schieffer, Julia Bain, and hundreds like them have failed to take the piss out of themselves or not.  

But I do know that journalists, as a bunch, are not held in the high and noble esteem that they should be, and I believe one of the reasons is that they mistake the importance of their jobs for self importance.

"It" means accepting any perk, no matter how trivial or lacking in pecuniary value, that is offered to you that wouldn't be offered just as willingly to the lowliest of your viewers or readers.

I do not ascribe good motives to anyone who facilitates the wishes of a journalist, unless those needs are clearly and openly related to the immediate performance of that journalist's job.  

Medill's Richard Hainey

At best, such facilitators are suck ups.  At worst, they are dolling out well-disguised bribes for which they expect to collect at a future date.  And any journalist who accepts is a co-conspirator.

One of my journalism school professors and mentors, the late Richard Hainey, used to lecture us at Northwestern University about being seduced by journalism's perks and privileges.  Like Robert Thomson, he warned us in sometimes colorful language about those who might dangle goodies in front of us, be they gifts, meals or experiences unavailable to others.

Professor Hainey might have liked to sing at the Grand Ole Opry (though I doubt it) or to harvest the best medical minds anytime a family member took ill.  But he never would have done it.

No.  In his best inimical editor's voice, Professor Hainey would have told anyone who offered him a chance to sing along with Trisha and Brad exactly where they should shove "it."  Would that more journalists follow suit!