There’s an emerging journalist.

One that can write code as quickly as she can type up a lede. One that can insert a hash tag alongside a witty tweet or knows as much about SEO as she does about AP Style. These new journalists are changing the ways we think about journalism.

And not only in how we think about journalism. But how we create, produce and interact with it.

The New York Magazine’s piece on these “renegade cybergeeks” was sorely needed- if only to remind our industry that there are answers, even if we don’t know them yet. That there are new ways, even if there aren’t any protocols to administer them and that there is life after print, even if we don’t have the model down quite yet.

Now the only question remains: Is this journalism?

I think we are heading in the direction journalism was supposed to go. That is to say, more interaction with our readers, viewers, listeners. (I suppose “news consumers” is the proper term.)

You are no longer limited by the newsstand. you can pick up any “paper” you want. If I want to read the front page headlines of the Chicago Tribune, The Houston Chronicle or Naples Daily News … I can.

Newspapers always talked about including different, diverse voices. Now there are.

These aren’t just shiny new toys. These are new ways of presenting information. And aren’t we in the business of disseminating it?

Nussbaum gets at the heart of it:

It was a radical reinvention of the Times voice, shattering the omniscient God-tones in which the paper had always grounded its coverage; the new features tugged the reader closer through comments and interactivity, rendering the relationship between reporter and audience more intimate, immediate, exposed.

More immediate, intimate and inclusive. This is journalism being performed and practiced at its best expectation.

The only question remains: How long will it take all of us to adapt?