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
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
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).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Bob, thanks for setting this up. There's much room for expansion in the area of media convergence, and an online journal is the perfect place for rapid and useful feedback.
To my mind, there are several large but related issues at play.
First, we should be clear on the overall scope of the journal: applied or academic? If both, how will they be reviewed side by side?
A related topic is: exactly what kind of convergence are we addressing? I think there's a general understanding that "convergent journalism" relates to traditional journalism given proxy online, or new tools and techniques used in reporting. However, I'd be excited to see us push the envelope further with citizen journalism, collaborative peer writing (wikis), social/cultural journalism (a la boyd and jenkins, respectively) and online advertising (a big piece of the online journalism puzzle that is nearly NEVER discussed in our circles).
I like your idea Bob of placing all data sets online for public download. This is, to be frank, quite ballsy! I don't know of any journal that currently does this. We could also alter the peer review process to encompass group feedback and review.
On more of a technical front. Bob, I remember talking with you about your desire for including multimedia stories. This would be great! But there is the question of the format of submissions. If we're going to publish, say, HTML, there is no guarantee that an article will be formatted corrected in later web browser iterations. Certainly we need a set of technical guidelines for multimedia components: FLV format for video, MP3 LAME encoded at 128k or better, etc. At minimum, the site should be sanely built with XHTML and CSS so we can make site-wide formatting changes to keep up with browsers.
Andrew asks:
If we're going to publish, say, HTML, there is no guarantee that an article will be formatted corrected in later web browser iterations. Certainly we need a set of technical guidelines for multimedia components: FLV format for video, MP3 LAME encoded at 128k or better, etc. At minimum, the site should be sanely built with XHTML and CSS so we can make site-wide formatting changes to keep up with browsers.
I would suggest that in terms of multimedia, the journal use socially-networked sites that are already available (a la YouTube or Blip.tv) for video, divshare or another service for mp3s, docstoc or issuu for pdfs that can be embedded, etc. This will ensure that the content reaches a wider audience (e.g. michael wesch).
Your point about HTML pages is a good one. Rather than host web pages and flash packages, perhaps it would be better to link to those examples, assuming they won't go the way of link rot.
I'm all for expanding the concept of "convergence journalism" (which seems to have expanded to be a rorschach test anyway) to include the types of journalism you mentioned, unless others object. Of course, that does then lead to a sort of bleed-over into the communications journals already mentioned.
Murley, I agree that the use of other sites to generate interest in the journal would be useful. But then we're putting our content in the hands of others - what if YouTube is gone in a year? It's a maintenance issue, at least.
What might be a good halfway point is the mirroring of content through various propagation points on the Internet. Or perhaps even better, if we could develop a relationship with a website that specializes in applied journalism writing where we could relay the latest entries.
I think it bears mentioning as well that implicit with propagation through consumer channels is the possibility that the reputation of the journal might not be seen as high initially. What I mean is that many have a vision of a journal as being defined, in a way, by the inaccessibility (physical, theoretical) of articles. Personally, at the end of the day, I feel we should be walkin' like we're talkin', and I welcome the opportunity to explore some of these new channels and hopefully squash some stodginess along the way.
I have a question related to the technical issues – does this journal have a home and a source of support? Or will the work of designing and maintaining the site depend on volunteer labor? To me the answer is critical in determining how we move forward.
I understood from Bob's speech at the final gathering in SC that the journal was funded by his school ... in which case, the structure would be secure in the short/mid-term at least, yes? If this is the be a professional gig, we need to hire copy-editors and admin people.
Deb,
Yes, the journal does have some limited funding. I was able to get a course release this spring, a graduate assistant and about $1,000 to promote the journal. Not a lot, but enough to get started. I've written a few grants, but haven't had any luck yet. So yes, volunteer labor will be critical for the success of the journal. I am hoping that having a good, diverse editorial board will help out a lot, but we will be needing some people to step forward to take leadership roles as section editors (ex: Reviews Editor).
If anyone wants to step forward in a major way and is at a university that would support this journal ($/release time/grad assistants), please let me know. I'd be happy to take on a reduced role and/or pass along the reins in the future if another person/university want to really help fund the journal. I'm not in this for the ego or P&T (just got promoted to professor in the spring--nice to be done with that!)--I just saw that there was a need for a journal like this and wanted to get things rolling.
(If there are any white Knights out there, just email me off list to discuss).
At any rate, you're right, Deb--we'll have to weigh our ambition against what we'll be capable of accomplishing with time and financial constraints.
Bob
Thanks, Bob. I assume you intentionally capitalized Knight? And that's what I'm wondering - should we consider creating a subcommittee of this group to go after funding ala Knight and others? Or have you already done so?
And one other question - I know there are a LOT of academics involved in SPJ and I assume ONA has a fair share as well, what would you think about partnering with a journalism organization on this effort?
I have reason to think that SPJ/SDX, in particular, might be willing to contribute in some way - maybe money, marketing, legitimacy, etc.
Let me know your thoughts. DW
Post a Comment