skip to main |
skip to sidebar
When balancing pros and cons to decide which approach to adopt – the profound case based analysis or the universality of the findings – the method applied offers a balance between the rather quantitative approach of a survey and the qualitative approach of the subsequent case based analysis of daily newspapers. Bearing in mind that the objective of the study is to develop an analysis instrument, the interaction of the two steps of quantitative and qualitative data gathering offers an unique insight into an editorial office of a newspaper in the context of the industry. The limits of such a data gathering should always be kept in mind, though. The first and the second step of the data gathering involve the answering of a questionnaire that, based on the studies of Kaltenbrunner et al. and Schantin, is about describing newsroom models. The questions are set in the multiple-choice style. Depending on the respective newsroom model, the answers are awarded points. For the purpose of the analysis, the answers are assigned to the four categories of organizational alignment, which are culture, tasks, structure and people (see chapter 3.2). The strong points of this method can be summarized as follows:
- Quantification of typical features of a newsroom according to three models.
- Profound differentiation within categories of forms of organization.
- Enables the comparability of different forms of organizations.
The weak points lie in the survey as an instrument. Firstly, the number of respondents determines the relevance of the findings. Secondly, you have to assume that the respondents answer the questions honestly and seriously. This requires that the answers offered reflect the facts of the three types of newsrooms properly. The composition of the classes of newspapers may deviate just slightly from the total stock of the German newspaper landscape; the deviation of about 6 percentage points, however, is undisputed and needs to be considered. Weak points of the data gathering can be summarized as follows: - Reliability of editors-in chief's answers is indeterminable.
- Inaccuracy in describing the newsrooms.
- Deviation of survey objects from the industry by 6.7 percentage points.
The attempt to describe the three popular types of newsrooms by means of 40 answers is accompanied by the attempt to come up with a definition of newsroom. At present, the newspaper industry lacks a universally applicable definition, which the present study requires. The contradiction to the suggested answers along with the overdue debate on defining how the form of organization in a newsroom might look like and how it is to be described would quicken the approximation towards a universal applicability of such a profound definition. The chances of the applied data gathering method can be summarized as follows: - Agreement on a universally applicable definition for newspaper organizations.
- Driving force for further scientific investigations of newsrooms.
- Investigations of reciprocal relations between newsroom structures and newsroom culture respectively tasks of employees.
- Assessment of future viability of existing forms of organizations, also in the sense of print and online.
The survey examines three different types of newspapers: tabloids (street sales), local and national papers. The benchmark, which is deduced from the average, could give rise to contradiction if one type of newspaper rejects the influence of another type of newspaper on the benchmark. If this is the case, then the data material needs to be differentiated. A possible danger of the multiple choice format is that the suggested attributes of the given answers do not completely or at least satisfyingly describe the individual newsroom model. In this case, missing out an answer or double answering is possible. This needs to be considered when carrying out the assessment. It has to be mentioned here that the decision as to which questions are to be allocated to the individual components of the organizational alignment is made arbitrarily and can be questioned. Still, the answer itself allows for a conclusion to be drawn about the form of organization. The risks of the applied data gathering method can be summarized as follows: - Doubts about the derivation of industry benchmarks.
- Flawed or incomplete answers to individual questions might be produced due to a different interpretation of the term newsroom.
- Doubts about the allocation of questions to the organizational alignment.
The set-up of the questionnaire with its possible answers according to the multiple-choice format is illustrated in appendix 1 of this study. The questionnaire has been supplemented with a personal judgment by the editor-in-chief surveyed as to his own role and his conception of convergence within the scope of the editorial form of organization.
According to BDZV, 351 newspapers with a total circulation of 19.95 million copies were published in 2009. 94.9 percent of which are local and regional papers (a total of 333), 2.8 percent are national papers (10), and 2.3 percent are street sale papers (8). Sunday and weekly papers do not fall in the scope of the study. In order to build a numerically solid foundation, the editors-in-chief of 107 daily papers, more than the amount defined by Steffen Büffel, were asked to participate in this survey. Most of them had already served as basis for the convergence model according to Gottschalk (see chapter 2.4.7.). The classes of newspapers selected for the purpose of this study deviate slightly (in percent) in terms of composition: 87.9 percent represent local and regional papers (94), 5.6 percent national papers (6), and another 6.5 percent street sale papers (7).
This results in a matrix whose y-axis represents the selected newspapers and whose x-axis represents the number of points – 0, 1, or 2 – assigned to each of the 40 questions. If a question is not answered respectively not answered completely, the mean value 1 will be used for the calculation for the time being.
Those cases are marked, indicating that the answer of this particular question can be error-prone and consequently might have an effect on the result in this particular category. The possible error rate has to be taken into consideration when analyzing and eventually assessing individual newspapers in comparison with the branch average.
The present examination has set as its goal to ascertain the status quo in the newsrooms of German daily newspapers according to the categories culture, tasks, structure, and people. The object was to develop from it an analysis instrument for assessing the degree of convergence between print and online. By conducting a survey among editors-in-chief, we ask those decision makers of a newspaper company for information who are responsible for the newsroom and hence substantially control the four categories mentioned above. The questionnaire of the survey extends the matrix model proposed by Kaltenbrunner et al. in such a way that ten questions relate to each of the four categories. In the first step, as is the case with Kaltenbrunner et al, the assessment is carried out by means of the multiple choice format. Each answer describes one of the three types of newsrooms and its form of convergence (integrated, cross-medial or isolated). Superficially, the 40 questions deal with the topics newsroom management, journalistic practice, work organization, and convergence in general. As mentioned above, the questions used for assessment and analysis are, unlike Kaltenbrunner et al, assigned to the categories culture, tasks, structure and people – a fact which is not obvious to the respondent. According to Schantin, it can be observed that the types of newsrooms develop from parallel via cross-medial to integrated. In the second step, each possible answer is assigned to a particular number of points in order to make the answers of the survey quantifiable: 0 for parallel, 1 for cross-medial, 2 for integrated. Consequently, in the matrix a fully integrated editorial office would score 20 points each in the categories culture, tasks, structure and people. Editorial departments that purely work cross-medially would hence score 10 points each in the four categories. In the third step, the average value scored in each of the four categories culture, tasks, structure and people provides information as to what extent, on average, German newspaper departments are integrated. With this benchmark, newspapers can individually be compared in order to locate deficiencies or competitive advantages within the individual organizations. The quantitative aspect serves as a basis for the qualitative examination that offers a profound analysis on the basis of the individual answers.
Posts
