No, Martha, not in '08

Brian Schraum

After I read the headline on Martha Stone's piece, I was getting ready to throw a shoe at my computer monitor. Then I read the rest of it.

I was expecting another old-time, old-media, "pry this newsprint from my cold dead hands" rant about the evils of multimedia journalism. Instead, I found her argument pretty interesting, however flawed.

Let's face it folks, the internets are here to stay -- people generally agreed on that way back in 2002. Multiplatform storytelling isn't going anywhere. In these two pieces you saw two very different approaches essentially supporting the same idea: that news outlets should embrace convergence and multimedia. On the one hand, elite backpackers who can do it all. On the other, teams of specialized reporters supported by dollars and innovation from management.

One key quote from Jane Stevens' piece: "Over the next 20 years, if economic conditions don't worsen ... the content of the newspaper and the television news shows are likely to be delivered principally over the Internet."

The catch: economic conditions have indeed worsened, not only nationwide but for the media business in particular. Layoffs and buyouts are an everyday event -- veteran reporters struggling to find jobs (and keep them). Newsroom budgets are perhaps tighter than ever before.

So yes, Martha, it would be fantastic if we had "top-down management's support and action, expanded research and development budgets." Maybe that was practical in 2002, but today I just don't see it. Where's the beef? How do we pay for it? No, do-it-all journalists probably don't produce the same quality that an entire team of specialists would. But we have to do the best we can with what we've got: fewer readers, fewer dollars, and fewer journalists for fewer teams. Backpack journalism is here to stay. Our own survival, like it or not, depends on it.