Teaching Journalismreal as our own—instructs them thatsuch ideas are historical artifacts of apre-Web culture, leftovers from howthings used to be.And they are certain (and right) thatthat’s not how things are anymore.Emergent InnovationAbout 18 months ago, a friend of mine,the executive vice president of one ofthe country’s largest media companies,was describing his frustration withcorporate culture. “After you’ve beenin the corporate environment for morethan six months, it’s impossibleto have an original idea,” he toldme. “So we all end up just talkingto ourselves, telling each otherwhat we want to hear.”It reminded me of my colleaguesin journalism educationduring the past few years, allstruggling to figure out howwe’re going to inject convergenceand “new media”—whateverthat means—into curricula thathaven’t changed all that much sincepre-cable TV.We’ve done, in good faith, what ourown experience tells us we should do:We’ve set up committees and attendedworkshops. We’ve benchmarked theprograms that looked like they knewwhat they were doing (even as theybenchmarked us). And we’ve earnestlydebated the banal: Are bloggers journalists?(Answer: When they’re doingjournalism.) Will they replace “real”journalists? (Answer: No.) Should weincorporate “new media” into all of ourcourses or create a “new media” requirementfor all students? (Yes. Both.)And we have drummed into our students—withan archaic resolve—thatthere is no moral difference betweensharing a music file and shopliftinga CD. (Is it possible we believe that?Really?)We’ve been talking in circles. Justlike our corporate counterparts.But there is one significant difference:Every fall, we enjoy the privilegeof newness. Millions of first-year studentsarrive on our collective doorstep,perpetually 18. And increasingly, thosenewbies will be culturally literate asJenkins defines the term, multitaskingbricoleurs armed with the confidenceof youth and the perspective of a childhoodlived as much online as off. Thatrepresents a whole slate of challenges—toour egos, to our pedagogy, to thecore mission of the academy—whichwe have not yet begun to anticipate.But in an era of extraordinary chaosand unpredictable change, that alsoIn the worlds they [the students]inhabit, online and off, content is free,knowledge production is collaborative,and media are participatory.may be among the greatest and mostundervalued assets we have.A corporate colleague and I decidedto test that theory, to leverage thatcreative capital in a process of openinnovation that would produce executableresults. Last summer, we piloted aninnovation incubator with six studentsat Ithaca College. We worked with hisexecutive team, which established thedeadlines and served as our client. Andwe gave the group a single instruction:Create something new in the onlinetravel market.That was it. No rules. No grades. Nolimits. No answers. It took six weeks,and it challenged the students in waysthey didn’t expect; in fact, they werefurious when we refused to set parameters,answer questions, or providedirection (that’s what faculty do, isn’tit? Well, isn’t it?) It was an open playingfield and, at the end of the project,they hit it out of the park.Now we’ve expanded the model.Under a grant from the Knight <strong>Foundation</strong>’sNews Challenge project, sevenjournalism schools across the countryare collaborating on a network of innovationincubators. 3 We’re testingJohn Seely Brown and John Hagel’snotions of productive open innovation:big ideas, firm deadlines, andclear outcomes.And the project’s faculty mentors aretracking the processes through whichstudents collaborate and generateoriginal ideas as a baseline for futureresearch and model development.By spring, we’ll have produced three“marketable” projects, field-testedthem with media partners, andpiloted a system for transferringintellectual innovation and creativecapital from the academyto a news industry desperatelyin need of both. And just as important,we’ll have reexaminedthe very nature of journalismeducation in a participatorymedia culture.Following the LeadersThat process must begin with an admissionthat cheap paper—no matterhow familiar—is a lousy platform forcontent delivery. That doesn’t meanjournalism is irrelevant; it just meanswe’ve stopped reading newspapers.And contrary to the handwringinggoing on in our newsrooms and ourclassrooms, that’s the result not ofcultural crisis but of a failing businessmodel. It’s also a wake-up callfor American journalism education,a signal that our own future dependsentirely upon our willingness to movebeyond the tools of our trade and thepractices of our past.For starters, we need to stop teachingsoftware (except, perhaps, to eachother). Our students will come to usknowing it, or knowing they can learnit when they need to. We need to stopconflating the newspaper industrywith journalism itself. When we seeyet another study about how kids3The participating schools are: Michigan State, <strong>University</strong> of Kansas, Kansas State,Western Kentucky <strong>University</strong>, Ithaca College, <strong>University</strong> of Nevada-Las Vegas, and St.Michael’s College.62 <strong>Nieman</strong> Reports / Fall 2007
Digital Demandsaren’t reading daily newspapers, weshould worry less about the democracyand more about the insularityof our research frame: Journalism isalive and well on digg.com, YouTube,Crooksandliars.com, and The SmokingGun.com. And when our studentschallenge our authority or fact checkour proclamations during class, weneed to stop scrambling for classroommanagement techniques and start addressingthe widening gap betweentheir assumptions about knowledgeproduction and our own.In short, our core mission, as educatorsand as journalists, is platformneutral—even if we are not. And ourcurrency and credibility will dependnot upon our ability to provide accessto equipment or train studentsfor a moribund industry, but uponour capacity to nurture collaborativeinnovation that produces accurate, informativeand interactive content—forevery screen and every audience.Fortunately, our future is as participatoryas it is inclusive; we have allthe intellectual capital we need, rightwhere we live. Her name is UWanna-LoveMe7 and, if we pay attention andadjust our assumptions—and ourpedagogy—accordingly, her generationwill lead us everywhere we needto go. Dianne Lynch is dean of the Roy H.Park School of Communications atIthaca College. On January 1, 2008,she will become the dean of theGraduate School of Journalism at the<strong>University</strong> of California at Berkeley.Adapt or Die of IrrelevanceThe clash between academic requirements for professors and the education studentsof journalism need to have grows more intense.By Karl IdsvoogI’m doing something few universitystudent journalists ever do. I’mwriting an article to be publishedon the pages of a magazine. There won’tbe an iPod version, or a video to accompanyits eventual appearance online, orinteractivity for discussion anddebate about what I say, or a blogor slide show—just words onthe page. Only gradually is <strong>Nieman</strong>Reports adapting to whatevery journalism student mustadapt to quickly—the evolvingmultimedia environment. Withuniversity journalism education,we can no longer trainprint journalists, or radio or TVjournalists, or photojournalists;today, these are all pieces of alarger pie we call multimediajournalism.Boom! That’s the sound heardas journalism schools blow up theircurriculum. That’s what we’re doinghere at Kent State, and the leadershipcomes from a pleasantly surprisingplace—Fred Endres, the senior facultymember, who is like Thomas Edisonin that he will stop coming up withinnovative ideas on the day he dies. Aformer print reporter turned professor,in 1987 Endres started the computerassistedreporting course at Kent. Hethen developed our first online journalismclass in 1999, and three years laterWith university journalism education,we can no longer train printjournalists, or radio or TV journalists,or photojournalists; today, theseare all pieces of a larger pie we callmultimedia journalism.started a collaborative course whereprint and broadcast journalists fight—Imean work with each other—on newsprojects.“It is all about multimedia, interactivity,24-hour deadlines, and newmethods of delivering the news,” saysEndres. “It’s more than we ever expectedof students 10 to 15 years ago.”In every class, students are forced tothink—and perform—across a varietyof platforms. Photojournalism professorTeresa Hernández observes that“multimedia has become the way of thestill photographer,” and this means thevisual gets immersed in sound.“People want to hear and seethings more and read less,” shesays. “Like it or not, that is thereality.” There’s another reality,too, that every journalismprofessor must recognize—thejob market. “Many of the photointernships are now for multimedia,”Hernández says.Jan Leach, a journalismprofessor who came to KentState a few years ago from aprint newsroom, shares thisexperience. “I’d be surprised if anynewspaper editor would hire a studentright out of j-school who didn’t have agood understanding of writing/producingonline,” she says.In the school’s legal <strong>issue</strong>s class, Barrettv. Rosenthal is to the Internet whatNew York Times Co. v. Sullivan is tolibel, as citizen journalism becomes the<strong>Nieman</strong> Reports / Fall 2007 63