Radio evolution - ICS - Universidade do Minho

Ilona Biernacka-Ligiezacollecting and sending material. Usually, everyone works in a joint editorial office, and the whole team is led byone common editorial director. It is the manager, in Norway often called the ‘conductor of the media’, whodecides on the place where the material will be published, how the topic will be piloted and continued. Everythingis done in accordance with the applicable rules of the various media platforms so that customers receive the bestpossible "end product". The material is developed by a team with the participation of representatives of differentchannels. Dailey does not specify a common location and template organization of editorial environments, as apart of a characteristic of full convergence, but in the context of the Norwegian media it is a natural and necessarycomplement to other characteristics of this level of convergence.Overlapping circles (Dailey’s model, pict. 1) illustrate the transition between the various stages ofconvergence. In other words, the particular features characteristic for cooperation on one level, may also appearon the other. When we move in the right side of the scale, we will be closer to full convergence, and it must beemphasized that cooperation at this level is only a supplement to the changes taking place at the previous levels.In practice this means that a fully converged collaboration also refers to cross-promotion, cloning, sharing ofresources/associates, joint planning and publishing.Of course, the location on the scale is not static. Individual channels can work closely together in selectedcases (e.g. election), while in the daily delivery of news they have a lower degree of co-coordinated and integratedproduction. This flexibility corresponds to the diversity of news production in the so-called 'omnibus media', whichare addressed to a heterogeneous audience (Gordon, 2003).The flexibility of the model may constitute a limitation for its use in practice. It will be difficult to locate thechannels having common management and coordinate their production. They work only in certain areas, but asignificant part of relevant material (perhaps even most) is produced taking the individual needs of each platformunder the consideration. Can we therefore, identify them as convergent or are they on the lower level ofconvergence scale (e.g. at the level of sharing content or even at the level of cooperative competition)? If themodel is to be applied in practice, it is worthwhile to examine more precisely dependencies between differentlevels. Dailey said that the cooperation between the channels must have at least one of the features characteristicfor a given level, so you can refer it to a specific convergence level. The more we can assign the characteristicelements of cooperation, the more typical it is for a given convergence level and its location on an axis becomesmore pronounced.Model of 'convergence continuum' can be accused of that from the standpoint of normativity is quiteinsecure. Dailey points out that the convergence levels located on the right of the center of axis are moredesirable than those at the center and left of it. The level of cooperative competition is considered the leastdesirable. It is difficult to imagine a media organization, whose primary objective is to achieve convergence at thelevel of cooperative competition. Whereas, we can easily see that both the level of sharing content andconvergence can function as strategic targets for the media houses, which base their activities on the integrationof the channels. As for the cross-promotion and cloning levels, they may be a target for those who want theirchannels to be more isolated.While the idea of integration has many supporters, joining channels does not seem to be the best solution.To keep channels specificity, it seems more effective to sustain their growth and competitive ability, isolation orlimited integration (Bressers, 2006). It is certainly important to see that separation, as well as integration arepossible alternatives for channel development strategy of media houses. Negative aspects of competition,unwillingness to change, underestimating other communication platforms will certainly constitute a clear obstaclein the integration of particular channels. Recognizing this element as characteristic, also for cross-promotion, andcloning, we will create some kind of cover for Dailey’s normative model.There are reasons for modifying the model in a way the negative competitive approach would not bedescribed as 'own level of convergence' but rather 'an obstacle to convergence', which can occur at all levels.174 | ECREA: Radio Evolution: technology, content, audiences – conference 2011