Excuse me?

Only one of them said anything actually to the effect of "I am not a journalist" - and it was never stated in the OP that Nicholas was one of the people barred from the Legislature. Her name is not featured in the piece, as I have shown earlier.

Apart from that, the provided links are indeed evidence of a pretty nasty and ludicrous publication for which I have no affiliation to or love for. I find Lauren Southern to be pretty funny and I agree with some of her statements, but that's it. I would not consider these people any more journalistic than Kotaku, who I also avoid.

But what everyone is going around yelling is "it's NOT journalism. Of course they're NOT journalists." but no one has said, with certainty and poise what journalism IS.

Is it journalism if it's printed, or from an organization that printed in the past? That's an incredibly conservative view and one that doesn't accurately reflect the changing state of media.

Is it based on finances? The little guy would be completely squeezed out. Reddit would never hear the end of it.

Or is it because it says something in a way that much of /r/canada, or reddit as a whole finds acceptable? That sounds more likely.

Tell me, if Rolling Stone had turned up, should they have been allowed in to report at the Alberta Legislature as part of an article? They have at least 1 criminal defamation case against them for their liberal attitude with the truth.

Now, as for my own comment? I made a statement, did more research to better understand the subject, saw I was incorrect, and instantly retracted the statement. That's pretty journalistic, if I do say so myself, and a damn sight more civil than most of the commenters on here.