Yes!
The question makes as much sense as asking, “Are writers who use newsprint journalists?” Blogs, like print, have many uses, some journalistic, some not. Wanting to exclude all bloggers, professionals invoke protectionist standards that some of their own colleagues wouldn’t meet. Nor would journalism's founding fathers. The lone pamphleteers who once formed the ‘press’ looked a lot like today's bloggers. 
— Dr Cherian George, NTU
Blogs attract regular, interactive readers whose loyalty mainstream publications dream of. Mainstream media companies are interested in this media form.
Bloggers are NOT necessarily solitary individuals or technology experts, but different people, sometimes from different countries contributing their views to the same blogging site.
They make an impact. Bloggers played a pivotal role in the downfall of Dan Rather, the veteran US TV newscaster. Singapore’s mr brown has an interesting platform. Shouldn’t we therefore categorise ‘serious’ bloggers who write as ‘journalists’, or report as ‘reporters’ — same as their mainstream counterparts? I would.
— Basskaran Nair, Capitaland
What's a journalist anyway but a person who keeps a journal or a diary? And that's precisely what bloggers are doing. We suffer from hubris if we think that only a select group of people deserve to be known as journalists — that is, ourselves.
As aptly and forcefully expressed by Jeff Jarvis in Online Journalism Review in a reference to bloggers and mainstream journos: "That's your audience talking there. You should want to listen to what they have to say. You are, after all, making a living writing for them. If you were a reporter worth a damn, you'd care to know what the marketplace cares about. But, no, you're the mighty NYT guy (he was referring specifically to NYT journalists). You don't need no stinking audience. You don't need ears. You only need a mouth.”
— Felix Soh, SPH
No!
Emphatically not! Whether in writing news stories or features, properly trained journalists check and double-check their facts, set these in context, work in relevant background information, insist on objectivity and balance, organise their material so their account flows smoothly and logically, and use temperate language unless there is a powerful reason to resort to strong words. Even in offering views, they ensure that the opinions expressed are based on fact, failing which, as any libel lawyer would tell you, what they write cannot be defended as fair comment. Bloggers, on the other hand, just sound off as they please. They are not bound by professional standards and ethics, and are responsible to no one but themselves. So you read them at your own risk, or peril. Newspaper editors who give bloggers space, or even prominence, in their pages, in the hope that this will attract younger readers, are doing damage to their calling.
— Leslie Fong, SPH
I tend to view blogging as an exercise in self-indulgence. While entertaining, and sometimes even informative, writing about oneself, and/or offering unsolicited views and opinions on everything under the sun does not quite qualify as serious journalism. Journalism, in my opinion, is a more precise art form where the writer is duty bound to check his/her facts, be thoroughly informed on the subject matter at hand, and finally, stand ready to bear the consequences should he/she be wrong. There is little room for self-indulgent — and sometimes flippant — commentary in serious journalism. But that said, I've come across some pretty interesting blogs, though I'd still have reservations about labelling their writers journalists.
— Ven Sreenivasan, SPH
