Convergence Benefactors 1 Running Head: CONVERGENCE BENEFACTORS Convergence For Whom? Identifying Benefactors Along a Convergence Continuum Convergence Benefactors 2 Abstract While many researchers have pondered the advantages and issues characteristic of convergence strategies at American newspapers, none have identified its benefactors. The purpose of this study is to advance a typology outlining the categories of the convergence continuum and identifying the primary benefactor of each. Four categories of convergence are identified. Four categories of convergence benefactors are also introduced and analyzed. A typology is proposed to determine which group benefits most from each convergence strategy. Convergence Benefactors 3 Convergence For Whom? Identifying Benefactors Along a Convergence Continuum Convergence – the merging of media technologies, methods and resources – has become a salient strategy for American newspapers struggling against the tide of declining circulation since the turn of the century. While many researchers have pondered the advantages and issues characteristic of convergence strategies at American newspapers (e.g. Ketterer, Weir, Smethers, & Back, 2004; Quinn, 2005; Singer, 2006; Smolkin & Leone, 2006), none have identified its benefactors. The purpose of this study is to advance a typology outlining the categories of the convergence continuum and identifying those groups that benefit most from each strategy. The benefits of each convergence segment will be determined by an assessment of what is gained and what is lost through the implementation of each strategy. Four categories of convergence and four categories of potential benefactors will be identified based on existing definitions and typologies. A typology will be proposed relating both categories to determine whom benefits most from what type of convergence strategy. Finally, suggestions for future empirical research will be proposed. This paper will attempt to fill a gap in academia regarding the benefactors of convergence strategies. By identifying these benefactors, researchers will be able to better concentrate their focus by targeting appropriate groups when studying the success of different convergence. With greater concentration comes better understanding of this emerging phenomenon and its potential for the newspaper industry. Convergence Benefactors 4 Convergence defined The term “convergence” wasn’t invented in the late-1990s. Its origins date back to the 1700s when it was used in the fields of natural science, political science, and economics. Researchers applied the term to relations between countries or scientific reactions. It wasn’t until computers gained mainstream use in the 1980s that the term found legs in the field of mass communication (Gordon, 2004). Advancements in technology during the past decade have thrust convergence into the regular jargon of media professionals who use the buzzword daily. While the word has garnered much attention from media professionals, there has been little inspection of its true meaning (Huang, 2007). Anecdotal evidence suggests many newspaper organizations treat the strategy more like a buffet than a sit-down meal, haphazardly guessing which elements of a convergence strategy will work for their organizations and whom will benefit from each. Newspapers are seeking to maximize their profits and strengthen audiences by moving onto the Web and teaming up with rivaling mediums. They call convergence “common sense,” yet many are unable to identify what it is or what makes the strategy beneficial for their organizations (Lowrey, 2005). The definition of convergence is evolving as media professionals scurry to practice it haphazardly (Dailey, Demo, and Spillman, 2005). They believed a “standardized definition remains elusive” (p. 150), and media professionals volley between defining convergence as the availability of audience-centered digital tools and journalist-centered storytelling methods. Dailey et al. argued convergence must be defined and must have an instrument of measurement in order to fully succeed. They wrote: “Without that definition and instrument, scholars cannot build a research stream Convergence Benefactors 5 that allows comparison of results, and professionals cannot make informed decisions on how to do their jobs better” (p. 151). Many researchers have sought an exhaustive definition encompassing all segments of the continuum. Jenkins (2001) wrote: “Media convergence is an ongoing process, occurring at various intersections of media technologies, industries, content and audiences; it’s not an end state” (p. 93). Jenkins organized the definition of convergence into five processes: technological, economic, social or organic, cultural, and global. Jenkins’ model is aimed at owners and media managers, warning them away from focusing on a solitary definition. He wrote, “No one medium is going to ‘win’ the battle for our ears and eyeballs” (p. 93). Jenkins believed the media industry is on the verge of a “digital renaissance” that “is sparking a range of social, political, economic and legal disputes because of the conflicting goals of consumers, producers and gatekeepers” (p. 93). Jenkins clearly saw the value of assigning a multidimensional definition to the new buzzword in an attempt to show its many layers. Dupagne and Garrison (2006) approached their definition of convergence from a managerial viewpoint. They assert “no single definition for convergence” is possible, and proposed a model outlining three business approaches to convergence and the variables they produce. They outlined three convergence strategies: technical, economic, and regulatory. Technical convergence refers to “the influence of digital electronics” (p. 239). Economic convergence can refer to the media user, but is more often used to describe “cross-media mergers” (p. 239). They explained regulatory convergence as the laws that govern media ownership. Convergence Benefactors 6 Gordon (2004) approached his convergence categories from a tutorial perspective. His work has been cited in textbooks (Kawamoto, 2004; Quinn & Filak, 2005) used to prepare future journalists for media careers that may overlap. Gordon conjured five categories of convergence characteristic of media organizations: ownership, tactics, structure, information gathering, and presentation (storytelling). Gordon presented these categories as a continuum – each dependent on the rest – that is slowly emerging among all forms of media. Gordon was optimistic about the implications of convergence, believing the trend will create new jobs and opportunities for young journalists. It’s important, he wrote, that emerging journalists display knowledge of all segments of convergence in order to succeed in any media profession. Convergence continuum Based on the literature, it is clear categorization is necessary for convergence to be properly defined and studied. Four categories working along a continuum are proposed to encapsulate each function of convergence as it relates to American newspapers: ownership, news-gathering, technology/packaging, and cross- promotion/news-sharing. Based on the convergence continuum proposed by Dailey, Demo, and Spillman (2005), this model depicts the symbiotic relationship of each component, thus leading to an exhaustive definition. The researcher used their continuum model to create categories through which benefactors of each strategy can be assessed. This model will be used in the following sections to examine the benefits and detriments of each strategy as it relates to potential benefactors. Convergence Benefactors 7 Technology/ Ownership News- Cross- packaging gathering promotion/ news-sharing Technology/packaging Technological convergence has drastically changed the way Americans get their news during the past century. Kolodzy (2006) pointed to the two U.S. invasions of Iraq – first in 1990, then again in 2003 – to demonstrate the role technology played in Americans’ access to news. During the first invasion, Americans were able to tune-in to a continuous stream of information through 24-hour cable news networks like CNN. This was a stark contrast from the means Americans used to get war information throughout the twentieth century, which included waiting for newspaper stories or scheduled radio and television broadcasts. During the second invasion of Iraq, consumers were able to access information instantly on the Internet or via portable electronic devices, such as cellular phones and PDAs (Kolodzy, 2006). Jenkins called technological convergence “the digitization of all media content” (p. 93). Kolodzy (2006) outlined two types of technological convergence: sender and receiver. She identified convergence for the sender as a new means of telling stories Convergence Benefactors 8 through multimedia packaging using formerly isolated technologies, such as audio, video, print, and online. Convergence for the receiver may one day equate to the availability of all media on one device. For now, it means the condensing of media on various devices, such as cellular phones that allow Web access (Kolodzy, 2006). This instant access has prompted a trend toward the globalization of news as many organizations cut back on their staffs and spending (Ricchiardi, 2007). Technological convergence has taken hold, with 1,279 United States newspapers producing online editions by mid-2003 (Greer & Mensing, 2006). McAdams (2006) identified six types of online media often utilized by news organizations implementing a technological convergence