Print, Broadcast and Online Convergence in the Newsroom

Many colleges and universities training student journalists in campus media organizations are considering converging print, broadcast, and online into one organization to adapt to industry trends and the new technological environment. Some are asking prudent questions (Pratte,1997) about why journalism educators should undertake such a paradigm shattering activity how print, online, and broadcast can merge, how the new organization will run, and what problems to expect. Over five years, students and faculty at Brigham Young University created a converged newsroom that brought together student broadcast, print, and online journalism into one organization. This article examines the convergence experiment using data gathered from stakeholder interviews, document analysis, observation, and a survey of students. In the first section we discuss the industry and technology-driven rationale converging newsrooms in educational institutions. The second section of this article examines the first steps toward convergence using the future search process and whole systems planning. The third section describes the generic changes in converged newsrooms and the editorial process flow in the BYU newsroom. The final section examines problems created by convergence, including the identity and commitment of students, alignment with industry and curriculum, and the increased complexity of processes. There are immense time and resource costs associated with creating converged newsrooms in colleges and universities. Prior to initiating a convergence project, institutions should consider factors externally and internally driving convergence. External forces The last century has seen an evolution to newsroom organizations from competitive to cooperative and now, in some cases, to convergence. Competition between newspapers in the United States was the norm for more than 300 years (Shudson, 1995). During that time, journalists forged the way for many freedoms and rights under which all forms of mass media are protected today (Weaver & Wilhoit, 1986). In the 1920s and 30s the immediacy of radio began to affect newspapers circulation, and publishers had difficulty adjusting to the new competitive marketplace (Beasley, 1996). With television in the early 1950s, came a new and even more powerful competitor, and since then each medium has battled for market share (Boyd, 1993). But economic forces and new technological capabilities in the 80s and 90s brought some of the once competing media organizations under the same cooperative roof. Gannett, The Chicago Tribune Company, and others initiated cooperation between their electronic media holdings and print holdings in order to create a competitive advantage in the marketplace. These cooperations kept the media organizations separate but found strategic touch points where information could be shared to make both organizations more competitive (Hammond and Porter, 1997). In the 90s increased return on investment expectations (Pavlik, 1996) and the emergence of the Internet has pressured media organizations to converge under the same organization. Pew Center Research (1998) indicates almost half of Americans are online. Information specific to the interests of the user, such as stock quotes, weather, traffic, etc., has drawn a large audience to Web sites. The Pew research suggests that increased Internet use creates an appetite for in-depth reporting and may channel readers to newspapers and magazines. It may also reduce time spent watching television. More are obtaining news from broadcast news Web site for (22%) and national newspaper Web site (16%) than Web site without affiliation (1998). This trend is important because it shows that the consumption patterns of news are changing. No longer are readers or viewers medium loyalists. A reader/viewer will see a story on one medium and follow the story, based on their own interests to another medium to get other views or greater depth. …