Earlier this week I was interviewed for a new book about where the newspaper industry is with online. Author, journalist and lecturer Tony Harcup, is interviewing various journalists working across digital platforms, both as research, and to feature as case studies.
During the course of our meeting he mentioned that another of his subjects was The Guardian’s Jemima Kiss. She’s a great case study as a “digital native“.
Which got me thinking. I must be, due to my print background, a “digital immigrant” case study.
But that’s not an identity I can take much pride in. It sounds like some journey of necessity rather than choice.
You only have to look at Pat Thornton’s descriptions of the four states of newspaper turned digital leaders to realise that, amusing as they are, I certainly don’t fit any of those bills.
Although I’ve probably met all these characters over the years (newspapers were piled high with them six or seven years ago), it certainly isn’t true for the many highly professional and talented webbies I run into around the country these days – many(but not all) of which enjoyed print careers at some point.
So while I completly endorse Pat’s view that “Web operations can only thrive when they are staffed by people who get the Web and enjoy using the Web”, I would just ask the natives to be a bit more welcoming.
Don’t see us as immigrants, embrace us as enthusiastic adopters showing an openness to explore all the opportunity the wonderful web has to offer.
Dim Sum Digital 
I see this from the other side: a software engineer, technologist and web “native” watching media companies moving over to the architecture and systems we geeks built ourselves, primarily for ourselves.
It might sound rude, but nobody in this side of the industry ever intended for multinational media companies to exploit these technologies for profit – until we realised we could skim a percentage of that profit for ourselves. As such, it might seem a bit of an alien landscape for many coming to it from another sector, a little like me turning up in Marakesh and wondering where the chip shop is…
In the last couple of years as plans for http://kagtum.com have evolved, I’ve been watching the “traditional” media market very closely. What I think I’ve witnessed is an enthusiasm for adopting technology but not for innovating. Most newspapers are behind the curve which is where the problem is for many firms.
My advice is for people with that huge experience of journalism to consider themselves product and service designers and work closely with technologists – innovate at technical, product and business levels. I really think it’s possible for a small media company now to break out and do something genuinely interesting. I’m having a go from the tech side of the fence, so I’d cheer on anybody wanting to do it from the media side.
LikeLike
I see this from the other side: a software engineer, technologist and web “native” watching media companies moving over to the architecture and systems we geeks built ourselves, primarily for ourselves.
It might sound rude, but nobody in this side of the industry ever intended for multinational media companies to exploit these technologies for profit – until we realised we could skim a percentage of that profit for ourselves. As such, it might seem a bit of an alien landscape for many coming to it from another sector, a little like me turning up in Marakesh and wondering where the chip shop is…
In the last couple of years as plans for http://kagtum.com have evolved, I’ve been watching the “traditional” media market very closely. What I think I’ve witnessed is an enthusiasm for adopting technology but not for innovating. Most newspapers are behind the curve which is where the problem is for many firms.
My advice is for people with that huge experience of journalism to consider themselves product and service designers and work closely with technologists – innovate at technical, product and business levels. I really think it’s possible for a small media company now to break out and do something genuinely interesting. I’m having a go from the tech side of the fence, so I’d cheer on anybody wanting to do it from the media side.
LikeLike
I have some issues with the digital native/ digital immigrant meme.
I do not think it is a useful dichotomy as it makes age an arbitrary measurement to digital understanding. It makes it seem that if you are young enough, then you automatically have a digital mindset. I have seen no evidence of this. My j-students are often rigidly locked in to an analogue vision of the industry, see print as their future and do not easily understand the principals of conversation contra lecturing that many of us propagate as the (only) future for journalism. The have some degree of technical knowledge (though that is often over-estimated) but no great conceptual grasp of the shift from analogue to digital.
(See Andys post [ http://www.andydickinson.net/2007/01/14/journalism-education-we-lost-em-before-we-got-em/ ]as a starting point into this discussion)
The follow-on from this is that journalism educators develop courses that are tech based and program oriented which plays to students strengths but never challenges their underlying “analogueness”.
Another problem with the meme is that it leads employers to believe that by just recruiting young people they will be gathering a base for change. This is leading to young, tech savy people being placed in leadership positions without them having the *journalistic* skills to make good strategic choices. I know of one example where the publisher is 34, has very strong tech skills but no journalism background and is making decisions that will have a long term impact on the publication. This is a danger to the journalistic development of our industry. A danger that the “digital native” argument perpetuates.
Also, looking around me, the people making a difference seem to be over 30. Have a look at your own area and see if that is also the case for you. I am over 50 and believe (possibly wrongly of course) that my grasp of the shift to digital and my immersion in and understanding of the process by far outstrips many (if not most) of the so called natives. This is not to say that there are not many under thirty doing great things in journalism, just that they are not doing them because they are under thirty 🙂
Its not an age thing. Its a curiosity thing. Which makes me a bit sad that so few journalists get it. Curiosity should be our stock-in-trade.
LikeLike
I have some issues with the digital native/ digital immigrant meme.
I do not think it is a useful dichotomy as it makes age an arbitrary measurement to digital understanding. It makes it seem that if you are young enough, then you automatically have a digital mindset. I have seen no evidence of this. My j-students are often rigidly locked in to an analogue vision of the industry, see print as their future and do not easily understand the principals of conversation contra lecturing that many of us propagate as the (only) future for journalism. The have some degree of technical knowledge (though that is often over-estimated) but no great conceptual grasp of the shift from analogue to digital.
(See Andys post [ http://www.andydickinson.net/2007/01/14/journalism-education-we-lost-em-before-we-got-em/ ]as a starting point into this discussion)
The follow-on from this is that journalism educators develop courses that are tech based and program oriented which plays to students strengths but never challenges their underlying “analogueness”.
Another problem with the meme is that it leads employers to believe that by just recruiting young people they will be gathering a base for change. This is leading to young, tech savy people being placed in leadership positions without them having the *journalistic* skills to make good strategic choices. I know of one example where the publisher is 34, has very strong tech skills but no journalism background and is making decisions that will have a long term impact on the publication. This is a danger to the journalistic development of our industry. A danger that the “digital native” argument perpetuates.
Also, looking around me, the people making a difference seem to be over 30. Have a look at your own area and see if that is also the case for you. I am over 50 and believe (possibly wrongly of course) that my grasp of the shift to digital and my immersion in and understanding of the process by far outstrips many (if not most) of the so called natives. This is not to say that there are not many under thirty doing great things in journalism, just that they are not doing them because they are under thirty 🙂
Its not an age thing. Its a curiosity thing. Which makes me a bit sad that so few journalists get it. Curiosity should be our stock-in-trade.
LikeLike
I suppose in the past journalists were always nicely pigeon-holed, be that radio journalists, local reporters or television correspondents.
So the requirement to stick those people who work online into a tidy little box should maybe come as no surprise.
But when you think that many journalists today can be equipped to cover a hyper-local beat with a digital voice recorder and mini video camera – maybe just “journalist” will have to be used in the near future.
LikeLike
I suppose in the past journalists were always nicely pigeon-holed, be that radio journalists, local reporters or television correspondents.
So the requirement to stick those people who work online into a tidy little box should maybe come as no surprise.
But when you think that many journalists today can be equipped to cover a hyper-local beat with a digital voice recorder and mini video camera – maybe just “journalist” will have to be used in the near future.
LikeLike
I agree with Craig’s take on pigeon-holes. But I think it goes a little bit further.
Within the print industry there are a number of layers – reporter, journalist, sub, photographer. Each of these has a number of skills associated with it which are clear – maybe rigid is better here – in the traditional structure but blurred in a digital environment.
I’m with Mark. The idea that there are digital natives is pretty naive and the concept of digital immigrants pretty senseless. Enthusiastic adopter sounds pretty could to me.
LikeLike
I agree with Craig’s take on pigeon-holes. But I think it goes a little bit further.
Within the print industry there are a number of layers – reporter, journalist, sub, photographer. Each of these has a number of skills associated with it which are clear – maybe rigid is better here – in the traditional structure but blurred in a digital environment.
I’m with Mark. The idea that there are digital natives is pretty naive and the concept of digital immigrants pretty senseless. Enthusiastic adopter sounds pretty could to me.
LikeLike
I agree with Craig’s take on pigeon-holes. But I think it goes a little bit further.
Within the print industry there are a number of layers – reporter, journalist, sub, photographer. Each of these has a number of skills associated with it which are clear – maybe rigid is better here – in the traditional structure but blurred in a digital environment.
I’m with Mark. The idea that there are digital natives is pretty naive and the concept of digital immigrants pretty senseless. Enthusiastic adopter sounds pretty could to me.
LikeLike
What great comments submitted so far. Mark, you’re absolutely right in saying it’s the over 30s who are doing the most exciting stuff. I wonder whether that’s because those with print backgrounds feel liberated by the new technologies and possibilities. After being in those “rigid”, “pigoen-holed” neviornments, as Andy and Craig rightly say, perhaps the over 30s appreciate it more whereas the youngsters (I’m old enough to be able to get away with that!) take it all for granted.
Paul – you always bring an interesting take. Journalists as “product and service designers”. A culture shift indeed.
LikeLike
What great comments submitted so far. Mark, you’re absolutely right in saying it’s the over 30s who are doing the most exciting stuff. I wonder whether that’s because those with print backgrounds feel liberated by the new technologies and possibilities. After being in those “rigid”, “pigoen-holed” neviornments, as Andy and Craig rightly say, perhaps the over 30s appreciate it more whereas the youngsters (I’m old enough to be able to get away with that!) take it all for granted.
Paul – you always bring an interesting take. Journalists as “product and service designers”. A culture shift indeed.
LikeLike
What great comments submitted so far. Mark, you’re absolutely right in saying it’s the over 30s who are doing the most exciting stuff. I wonder whether that’s because those with print backgrounds feel liberated by the new technologies and possibilities. After being in those “rigid”, “pigoen-holed” neviornments, as Andy and Craig rightly say, perhaps the over 30s appreciate it more whereas the youngsters (I’m old enough to be able to get away with that!) take it all for granted.
Paul – you always bring an interesting take. Journalists as “product and service designers”. A culture shift indeed.
LikeLike