Vote on name, round 2

We're voting via email and polldaddy on the new name.  So, if you haven't already voted, be sure to check your email and send me a note, along with voting at the polldaddy link I included in your email.  The early results are leaning toward "Journalism Innovation" with a subtitle.   If that option prevails, we'll hold a follow-up survey on people's preferences for the subtitle.

In the next couple weeks I'll be having us vote on a couple other issues and be soliciting applications for editors of the journal's sections.  If you haven't already given feedback on the sections of the journal (see later post), please contribute your comments there.

Bob

Vote on name

We've had some wonderful discussion on the name voting. Thank you for all of your comments.

Here are some early results on name voting, which include responses emailed just to me and responses replied to the entire list. We still have about 4-5 ballots outstanding.

Journalism Modifier:

Interactive=1

Multimedia=2

Convergent/ce=4

Integrated=4

Innovative/Innovation=13

Journal/Review/Research/No accompaniment

Review=1

Research=4

None=5

Journal=15

--------------------------------------

I'll wait another day before sending an email out with final results. Here are my initial thoughts:

--while we have a lot of divergent views, it seems like some form of Innovation/Innovative has bubbled up to the top. And, my sense is that as the discussions have flourished, some of those originally wanting convergence or integrated seemed amenable to some form of Innovation.

Because there is a blog and domain name: http://www.innovationjournalism.org

my first instinct would be to go with "Journalism Innovation" in the title, reversing the name to reduce confusion and allow for the www.journalisminnovation.org domain name. Thoughts?

As for me, you might remember I tentatively gave the beast the title of Journal of Convergent Journalism months ago. While I like Convergent--and Multimedia and Integrated also have strong appeal--Innovation is sounding pretty good.

--The vast majority wanted either Research or Journalism in the title, with most preferring the latter. But, those concerned about including such a title--especially for P&T reasons--might be OK with including the Journal moniker in a subhead.

I'll wait to get some of the final votes in and then we'll probably do a quick runoff, most likely deciding on

--the form of innovation/innovative

--order (innovative/innovation before or after Journalism)

--whether to put Journal in the title or subhead.

Thanks again for such vigorous, and yet awfully polite debate.

Bob

Submission/Review Guidelines/procedures

There are many details to work out with this journal, not the least of which will be the submission and review guidelines.  Two of the many issues to discuss include the following:

1) Turnaround time

One of the greatest advantages of an online journal, and a fitting one for covering a field which prides itself on rapid posting of information, is the ability to publish articles in a timely fashion. Not constrained by a print publication schedule, we can publish an article as soon as it is reviewed, revised and ready to be uploaded to our site.  Naturally, that means also having a quick turnaround time for reviewers.  Tim B shared with me that an online journal he works with required from its reviewers a three-week response to submissions.  I don't want to impose such a requirement unless we have consensus about such a time frame.  As for myself, my background in journalism has led me into the bad habit of lacking motivation until deadlines approach--and thus I'm better off with a short response cycle and don't have the guilt accompanying projects hanging over my head for a long time.  And, unless it comes at a bad time in the semester, three weeks is usually sufficient time to juggle a review with my other work.

But, what say you?  Is three weeks too onerous? Should we go with a month or more?  Or cut it down to two weeks?

2) Submission methods

Since we'll be publishing hypertexts on our website, it makes sense to have the authors submit these same hypertexts--but, do we want to require them to submit them via CD-ROM/DVD?  Or just give us a hyperlink to their submission that has been placed on the web--which is probably much better, outside of the concern that the hypertext could be altered during the review process.  Thoughts?

Feel free to also use this thread to raise other concerns about the submission/review process.  I strongly encourage you to visit the submissions guidelines page for the Kairos journal I mentioned earlier (http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/submissions.html).  There are a lot of technical and other guidelines we may want to borrow/revise/consider, and using their guidelines page as a starting point might prevent us from having to reinvent the wheel.

Editorial Board members

I'll be making edits to this post as we add a few more members, but I thought it would be good for you all to know who is a part of this group.  Frankly, I'm very happy with the composition of the group–we've got a great mix of people with industry experience in print, broadcast and online, we've got representation from several countries and four continents and we've got a mix of scholars with different specialties from small, medium and large schools.  That diversity will come in very handy, as I expect that we'll be getting very diverse submissions.

Thanks again, one and all, for agreeing to serve on this board.  Please let me know if there are any errors in omissions, names, affiliations, etc.  And, let me know via email if there others who you think would be great additions to the board.

Tim Bajkiewicz, Virginia Commonwealth University

Jody Brannon, Arizona State University/Carnegie-Knight News 21 Project

Ralph Braseth, University of Mississippi

Tim Brown, University of Central Florida

Steven Chappell, Middle Tennessee State University

John Cokley, University of Queensland (Australia)

George Daniels, University of Alabama

Tony DeMars, Texas A&M-Commerce

Bill Densmore, University of Missouri/Reynolds Journalism Institute/Media Giraffe Project

Mark Deuze, Indiana University/Leiden University (Netherlands)

David Domingo, Universitat Rovira i Virgili (Catalonia, Spain)

Vince Filak, University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, VP, College Media Advisers

Steve Fox, University of Massachusetts

Augie Grant, University of South Carolina

Alfred Hermida, University of British Columbia

Edgar Huang, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

Tom Johnson, Texas Tech University

Ken Killebrew, University of South Florida

Janet Kolodzy, Emerson College

Robert Mercer, Cypress College

Mindy McAdams, University of Florida

Bryan Murley, Eastern Illinois University/Innovation in College Media

Jennifer Palilonis, Ball State University

Chris Paterson, University of Leeds 

Stephen Quinn, University of Technology Sydney (Australia)

Kenneth Rosenauer, Missouri Western State University, President, College Media Advisers

Andrew Schrock, University of Southern California/Annenberg

Norman Sims, University of Massachusetts/Media Giraffe Project

Dave Stanton, University of Florida

David Thompson, Kennesaw State

Leslie-Jean Thornton, Arizona State University

Deb Wenger, University of Mississippi

Jeff Wilkinson, United International College (China)

Journal sections

One of the other critical first decisions we'll need to make is how to break the journal down into manageable organizational sections.  There are many ways to break it down into sections:

--Conventional (peer reviewed articles, book/scholarship reviews, perhaps teaching tips, etc). 

--Based on types of convergence: ownership, technological, organizational, etc.

--Based on digital journalism features: multimedia, interactivity, distribution

--Perhaps by geography: US/North American, International, college media

--Based on focus: theory, industry research, education/training

--Other?  

My first inclination is to go with a more safe, traditional format.  But, this is a different type of journal, and if ever there were a time and type of journal to try something new, this would be it.

Naturally, the organization will affect both the navigation and visual design of this online journal as well as the organization of the staff/board.  At some point we'll want to set up editors for these sections, as well as perhaps positions such as webmaster, interactive editor (in charge of reader polls, letters to the editor, moderating forums and comment sections at the ends of articles), etc. 

In the meantime, PLEASE share your ideas or reactions to some of these possibilities.

Bob

Open Thread

In the next couple weeks, I'll be posting discussion threads on a variety of topics--submission guidelines, review policies, journal sections (teaching research? industry research? international? book/article reviews? etc). And, I'd be happy to start any threads you think we should start (or even email my account/password information for you to post your own threads on this blog).

But, in the meantime, I also wanted to create an open thread where you all can post any comments or suggestions without being confined to the more formal threads. So, type what is on your mind here, respond to others' comments, etc.

Bob

Welcome, naming of journal

Thank you, everyone, for your supportive comments during the Convergence and Society conference.  I am glad  many people agree that a journal dedicated to this field--and one that is converged itself--is long overdue.  As I mentioned, I have only recently secured funding for a graduate assistant, some promotional expenses and a bit of release time, but I wanted to put out an announcement and some preliminary materials at the conference since it was the perfect outlet.  

At this early stage nothing has been finalized, which is why I am happy to have such a strong advisory/editorial board to help shape the direction of the journal.  

I thought this blog might be the easiest vehicle for group discussions and interaction about that direction. Over the next few months I'll be asking all of you to put in your two cents about various aspects of the journal in hopes of getting some consensus before moving forward. You're welcome to also make comments to me off-list or suggest other threads or concerns you would like to have us debate.

One of the first things to discuss is the name for the journal, since even that is up for debate. Naturally, we'll want to finalize the name before securing a domain name and proceeding with some web site mockups.  In the preliminary documents I put forward the name Journal of Convergent Journalism.  Some earlier iterations were Convergent Journalism Quarterly and Journal of Convergent Media.  I leaned away from the former title because it implied a print-based publication cycle, and leaned away from the latter title because the inclusion of "media" implied a more broad scope (like the journals Convergence and New Media and Society).  One advisory board member has already raised a concern about the repetition in Journal of Convergent Journalism, suggesting cutting it down to Convergent Journalism.

Your thoughts on these possible names?  Other suggestions for a name?

Bob