Backpack Journalism - A Critique

(by Allan Vestal)

In a discussion with a recent J-school graduate this past week, the topic of convergence journalism came up. The graduate opined that studying in this sequence seemed like “getting all appetizers, but no main courses” at a restaurant.

This criticism is nothing new to me: many in the J-school seem to share this sentiment, as (apparently) does journalist Martha Stone, evidenced by her article “The Backpack Journalist Is a ‘Mush of Mediocrity.’”

I feel that this observation is largely accurate, as print and broadcast reporters, videographers and graphics specialists each have highly developed career skills; asking aspiring convergence journalists to learn and expertly practice the techniques of each profession is certainly a tall order.

A more workable solution than this might to have students specialize in one area of reporting (and to teach them enough about reporting in other mediums that they can produce a report for alternate media in a pinch).

In the working world, then, news organizations would assign teams of journalists with concentrations in varying media to most multimedia stories, using one-man-band “backpack journalists” sparingly, usually in cases that are best reported by individual reporters (breaking news items of minor significance, situations in which budgetary concerns are prevalent or cases where only one reporter is allowed). This would allow for most multimedia projects to feature the work of multiple reporters in their areas of expertise, while still allowing nimble, multiply-talented journalists to produce individual works where they fit with the overall nature of issues (or of the outlets producing the coverage).

There is indeed a niche for singular backpack journalism – and for multidisciplinary training in the J-school – but this is by no means a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution for the coverage of tomorrow’s news.