Monday, October 02, 2006

I worked for an HPNR

So I'm writing these chapters for a convergence journalism book, especially the one explaining print for broadcast folks, and I find myself shying away from contining to write "newspaper" or "print."

Am I ashamed? Hardly. But what my brain is trying to say is that we are too tied to those terms -- "newspaper" unfortunately has a lot of the baggage I've talked about before -- that we tend to confuse the paper part with the news part. "Print" has some of the same baggage, as in "I'm print," said with a certain defiance.

In this search for a term, I found myself typing "historically print newsroom." And I like it.

It has a certain ring for me -- the idea of a culture we want to preserve of comprehensiveness and accuracy, but in a way that allows that maybe we are more than that now. I suppose it, too, could be read defiantly -- we are historically print and intend to stay that way. But I like to think of it as similar to the historically black colleges and universities -- acknowledging our history, tradition and culture, but also opening the door to moving forward.

So, I worked for and still work with HPNRs. How about you?


At 10/2/06, 8:35 PM, Blogger Murley said...

What about TMFKAP - The medium formerly known as print. :-)

At 10/5/06, 3:44 PM, Anonymous Will Atkinson said...

How about "traditionally print newsroom"?

"Historic," to me, connotes stodginess and irrelevance. Where a university benefits from having a venerable history, newspapers benefit from being current and able to capture the spirit of modern times.

"Tradition" implies a continuous behavior, one that is still in use today. "Historic" suggests something that was important in the past.

At 10/9/06, 12:41 PM, Blogger Doug Fisher said...

I like that. We'll make it TPNR, then.

At 10/9/06, 12:44 PM, Blogger Gary Karr said...

DTAD - Dead Trees and Digital.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home