<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, please enlighten me. Pretty please.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let me restate my position: “My point is that there is no need for a potential journalist to get a journalism degree.” This makes the Medill “experience/training” and “residency requirement,” etc. trivial and superfluous. If you think about it, the term “residency requirement” is quite a misnomer. Normally, when we use the term, we mean something that needs to be fulfilled in order to reach a certain goal. For example, a future doctor needs to fulfill his or her residency requirement in order to become a doctor. Or, a potential state resident needs to fulfill his or her residency requirement in order to become a state resident. And so on. But this is not the case with journalism. A budding journalist does NOT need to fulfill his or her “residency requirement” in order to become a journalist. It’s not actually a real “requirement” at all. The overwhelming majority of journalists do not have journalism degrees, let alone any “residency requirements.” So what makes you think that this “residency requirement” (or for that matter, the journalism degree itself) makes things NOT equal?</p>