There's a chance of running into problems when you try and define 'journalist', though. If a journalist is someone employed by a major news corporation then you

There's a chance of running into problems when you try and define 'journalist', though. If a journalist is someone employed by a major news corporation then you are going to disadvantage the independent journalists with not much more than a website, a good number of contacts in their address book, and a sizable Twitter following. If different rights and responsibilities are allocated to government-approved journalists than to independent journalists or regular citizens, then someone in that government is going to have to hand out the 'officially a journalist' card. I might like the government in power today and I might really like them to deny the official journalist protections you envisage to the journalists from the outlets I think are biased and lean the wrong way. However, because there is a pretty good chance that, in a democracy, the other guy is going to win, I wouldn't look forward to those same restrictions being placed on the journalists I like to read. Hence, the best thing is to protect everyone's freedom to write and publish, to question authority, and to speak.