the political chasm in the newsroom.

According the recent Pew study of American media habits, Democrats and Republicans aren't on the same page. Nor are they in the same living room, nor are they perusing the same magazines at Barnes and Noble.

According the study, a significant number of Democrats and Republicans read news that caters to their beliefs. According to the study, "the gap between Republicans and Democrats in regular viewership of the nightly network news on ABC, CBS, or NBC is now 14 points, nearly three times as large as it was in 2004; currently, 38% of Democrats regularly watch compared with 24% of Republicans. There is a slightly smaller gap in the regular audience for NPR ­ 22% of Democrats listen regularly, compared with 13% of Republicans."

This begs the question-- whatever happened to journalistic objectivity? If our audience splits so cleanly between Republicans and Democrats, clearly journalists are doing something to attract partisan audiences. Whether it is the way we write, what we choose to cover and how we select quotes, every act of editing is an expression of politics. So what can we do to edit out politics from our copy? And is it worth it?

I only have more questions. Does writing without politics preclude a writer from being politically active? Most journalists I know have opinions which help inform and shape their writing. But there is a serious problem that occurs when we focus purely on our own opinions. One person cannot encompass a multiplicity of ideas, but a NEWSROOM CAN.

Herein lies the issue. Typically, people are more comfortable in work environments where others share their views, or in workplaces where discussion of politics and other tenuous issues is discouraged. The latter option doesn't work for news rooms, which ideally are hot beds for such conversation. Perhaps these tensions are what discourage conservative journalists from working at so-called liberal publications and vice versa. Perhaps then news rooms need to have extensive workshops on how to converse about tense issues.

As part 6 of the study shows, it's become increasingly easier for Americans to get their news though more personalized ways. Because of this, journalists must be wary of homogeneous news rooms. Diversity is important, but it's more than a race or ethnicity thing-- it's also ideological.

convergence might work in the longterm

When I sat down to read the Biennial Audience study from the Pew Research Center (published July 30, 2006), I decided to open a Word document, and copy and paste anything surprising I read. After reading two sections, I had four pages of comments.

The Pew study largely confirms what newspapers (and corporations) have been harping about for as long as I've been interested in journalism. "Readership is falling," we are told, "we are losing younger audiences." Media outlets seem to believe that the Internet is stealing their viewers, listeners and readers; therefore they compensate by piling their efforts and their content into their web sites.

But what the research shows is that the Internet has little to do with this drop off. A cultural shift in the way Americans read newspapers and consume news is at fault. The study states:

The arrival of the Internet as a news option has not changed this basic pattern of news consumption over the past decade...This stability reflects the fact that the Internet is, for the vast majority of its users, a supplement to other traditional news sources. Of the 23% who get news online on a given day, the vast majority also use other news sources; just 4% of the public relies on the web alone. And the average online news consumer spends far more time per day getting news on TV, newspaper and radio than they do getting news online.

Readership levels seem to be dipping for a litany of different reasons. This leads to one important realization-- media corporations' efforts to beef up web sites will not have their intended effect until the next generation of web users.

Journalism schools have overwhelmingly emphasized the importance of versatility and familiarity with various operating systems and programs. At Medill, newspaper students are required to take one class that teaches us a technological skill. In News and New Media, we learn how to write, report and design web projects. In Print Media Design, we learn Quark. In Analytical Reporting, we use programs to crunch numbers. This coursework reflects an industry-wide emphasis on technology and the Internet. What the Pew study suggests is that such efforts have no impact in the short run. The study says:

The reach of newspaper web sites is still limited. By far, most newspaper readers are still reading the print version ­ on a typical day fully 94% read it in print, while 14% read it on the Internet (some do both). Put in other terms, if Internet newspaper consumption were removed from the long-term trend and we looked at only the share reading the print version of the newspaper, the proportion who read yesterday would drop only a few points to 38% overall.

Still, the web is the primary avenue for younger people to get their news. Younger Americans are not cultivating a habit of reading newspapers in print. Just 22 percent of those under 30 report reading the newspaper in print the previous day, down 6 percent from 1996. But there is a light at the end of the tunnel. The study shows, "newspaper web sites make up for much of this loss. In fact, the very youngest adults surveyed ­ those ages 18 to 24 ­ were slightly more likely to have read a newspaper this year than a decade ago, due in large part to their increasing use of online newspapers."

What the research shows is that in the long run, corporations' emphasis on the Internet may prove to be smart. When younger readers, who overwhelmingly use the Internet for news, become the majority of media consumers, the statistics of readership may flip-flip dramatically. Readership for young people may also increase as they gain responsibilities, jobs and news becomes an integral part of their life and society.

why my future looks bleak.

Over the course of centuries, the term convergence has adopted multiple meanings. It's most recent definition refers to the way television and print journalists have to "converge" talents for the web. Northwestern professor Rich Holden, writing in 2002, predicts that these partnerships will expand with the advent of advanced Internet technology.

Holden discusses five different areas for convergence: ownership, tactics, structure, information gathering and storytelling. As of his writing, the most common type of convergence is through ownership or partnerships between papers and TV stations. Less common forms include storytelling and information gathering.

Holden predicts that "the progression from ownership and tactical convergence to information gathering and storytelling convergence will be slow." He's only half-right. Five years later, the media organizations' focus has shifted dramatically to storytelling convergence. Newspapers like the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Post all have their own multimedia sites and produce content exclusively for them. Holden suggests that this method of convergence would be best facilitated by creating a multimedia team or by creating more "backpack journalists" not unlike vagabond reporter Kevin Sites. Increased storytelling convergence has had a profound impact on a journalist's job. We are encouraged to think more pictorially, and some reporters are responsible for full-scale multimedia productions.

But Holden is blatantly wrong about one thing-- he says, for "information gathering and storytelling convergence to become commonplace, many new kinds of jobs will need to be created, and many existing jobs will require new skills."

In actuality, jobs are decreasing. The US Department of Labor predicts that the journalism industry will experience "slower than average" growth until 2014, but papers still expect reporters with bachelors' degrees and ample newspaper experience. So, budding journalists cannot even hedge their bets by doing some other kind of internship in college to gain skill to enter a different market. Newspapers want skilled, experienced and committed students without bothering to commit back.

It would be nice if Holden was right, but he isn't. Convergence is not just about consolidating resources, it's about consolidating jobs.

digital photojournalism

In her essay "Digital Photojournalism," Cheryl Diaz Meyer relates her personal experiences taking photos in Afghanistan after 9/11 using the latest technological devices. Meyer uses that experience as a springboard to relay her opinions about the influence of technology on photojournalism and journalists' ability to relay news to readers. She writes that the war in Afghanistan was a seminal moment in this new chapter of photojournalism.

"It was the first war in which all still photojournalists worked with digital cameras, transmitted via satellite phones, and were constrained only by the rigors of war," she said. "As a journalist, having a good satellite phone was a safety issue and a necessary tool for the job," she argues.

It's hard to disagree. First, from a financial standpoint, it would be too expensive to support foreign correspondents and their tech support staff. It would also be difficult to ensure employee safety. So, it obviously makes sense to have photographers who are already familiar with one visual medium to try their hand at video.

But as sensible as the trend is, Meyer wonder if it will lead to better journalism. Most journalists are extremely passionate about their work, be it photography, writing or videography. When you ask a writer to take pictures, he will not approach that skill with the same passion as he does writing, at least not initially. He does not have a technological edge and often has to learn how to operate new technology via a few explanatory classes or, worse yet, on the fly. I can't imagine photographers experiences being any different. As Meyer says, "the challenge of learning new technologies and poor training has caused degradation in the overall quality of photojournalism." This is especially troubling in remote areas where there are few journalists and options. It's important to get the best possible image.

It's also troubling because it cuts into reporters' and photographers' free time. Part of the joy of being a journalist is the ability find new stories and angles by pure luck. I wonder if new photographers won't be spending more time figuring out new-fangled gadgets and less time hunting down the perfect picture or photo essay. A journalist becomes a "jack of all trades."

Some photographers are fatalistic about these new developments. In her article, Meyer quotes Kenny Irby, head of the Visual Journalism Program at Poynter as saying: "Because of technology, photographers can spend more time with subjects. You can deliver content more efficiently and quickly from remote areas and that content can be multimedia-based. I'm not saying this is great-- I'm saying, this is reality."

But Meyer still questions this new breed of platypus journalism through her boss, Ken Geiger, director of photography at the Dallas Morning News. Geiger notes: "The level that we expect our photographers to perform precludes them from multi-tasking."