Because I'm too young to be a part of the Greatest Generation and too old to be included in the Boomer Generation, I've never been able to say where I belonged, generation-wise. And now, it appears, I don't know what I am, profession-wise.

Until the other day I always figured I worked in what has long been known as the "mainstream media." But according to a declaration by something called the Daily Kos, newspapers such as The New York Times, The Washington Post and this one no longer are relevant enough to use that term. Instead, we should be referred to as the "traditional media." Which I think is a is polite way of saying, "Give it up, grandpa. It's all about the Internet, now."

The Daily Kos is, as you may or may not know, a visible presence on the Internet. The Web site gets a reported 14 million to 24 million hits a month and has been identified as "the biggest liberal hub online," with a roster of backers and bloggers not likely to appear anytime soon on Rush Limbaugh's dance card. All of which, according to its founder, makes it the voice of the mainstream.

Liberal bloggers, insists Markos Moulitsas, are "representatives of the mainstream, and the country is embracing what we're selling." Which sort of puzzles me, because I'm pretty sure a large part of the country believes that the current mainstream media always has been as liberal as it was possible to get without actually being card-carrying members of the Communist party.

But maybe he's right and we should just call ourselves the "traditional" media and then fade away without making a fuss. Before I'm willing to concede the mainstream, though, I have a few questions: Who are these Websters and bloggers -- whether liberal or conservative -- and what are their qualifications to deliver the news? Do they have training and/or experience in journalism? Not that great deal of training is necessary. I've always felt that a reasonably intelligent monkey could be trained to be a journalist in three or four hours, although a dimwitted monkey probably would want to go on get its master's degree. Still, it would be reassuring to know that they have heard of the "who, what, when, etc." concept.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of bloggers have excellent credentials to write about the things they do. But do they have editors? Do they have some nit-picker reading their copy and checking their facts? Do they feel any obligation to present balance in their stories, or is their only obligation to present opinions that will appeal to their readers?

A lot of my friends say they can't do without a newspaper they can hold in their hands. Then again, a lot of my friends are in, or approaching, the liver spots generation. But, even though I've spent a lifetime reading my news via a medium that leaves smudges on my fingers, I think I can adjust to reading it on a screen.

Because I don't care all that much how it gets to me. I just want to know where it's coming from.