It is an exciting time at unbound. We recently celebrated five years of consecutive publication. Since we are five years old and unbound, I will break the tradition for an editor's note and tell you about the unbound Institute's fifth year celebration. Frankly, until the last minute I was undecided about attending the festivities. I had a few things to complete on the web that I thought might have been better use of my time. In the end, I decided to go. I am glad I did. At the lecture, which was the highlight of the celebration, I heard some things that made me decide to kill my previous note in favor of a new one. Though I work with journalism students, I have not had much contact with employed journalists who work full-time in news organizations. I had never been privy to an insider's view of what it is like working in paid news organization. While as a news consumer I am concerned about the decreasing number of news organizations, I did not know what journalists felt. I suspected taking news organizations out of the hands of individuals and turning it over to the industry that the organization reports on might be problematic. I didn't know whether journalists had similar concerns. I thought I knew what the future of journalism would be if the present trend continued. It did not look bright. I went to the lecture expecting to hear Natalie Byfield say the future of journalism looked quite dim. Granted, I thought I might have to dig for this forecast but I was fairly sure it would be there. I also had a question I can now share: Why does anybody stay journalism? Let's take a look at the job conditions. Deadlines. Meet them or die! Hidden Agendas. (restricts viewpoint, conceals truth of events, and misleads public) Sources. (Ms Byfield had an assignment to get information on a hospital patient. She recognized the family of the patient and got on the elevator with the doctor and the family. She overheard a doctor's report on the condition of the patient in the elevator and called in the story.) Silly Assignments. (Ms Byfield spoke of having to go out at midnight to find women who use their children for begging. Prejudices. (If you are the victim: Why stay in the field? If you are a bystander: Why stay in field where that type of climate persists?) Killed stories. (After getting permission, doing all the research, getting the quotes, and finishing the copy, Ms Byfield said her story ran on Saturday.) Ms Byfield answered the question without my having to ask it. She said she was "passionate" about journalism. I heard the passion ring strong and true in her voice. I heard that same fervent passion in voices of the other journalist who spoke during the discussion phase. That passion seemed to give those journalists a resiliency that allowed them to endure and hold on to a belief that their contribution was not just important but mandatory. What makes a person continue to work in journalism it turns out is really quite simple? They must! Their dedication to a journalist's duty - truth to the public -- needs balanced coverage of the news. Balance coverage requires their representation in news organizations -- the prospective they bring to an issue is unique and vital. Service to the truth demands their perseverance. The news consumer looks for various accounts of a single issue because a single accounting of an event only gives the reader one writer's perspective much like a snapshot. News consumers look for the panoramic view of multiple accounts of events to better understand what occurred and its aftermath. Today's pool of journalist taking on the commitment to "service of truth" will reflect diversity in perspective through the reporter while retaining accuracy in the reporting -- truly unbound!