I've been out there sharing my vision for wide-scale establishment of innovation laboratories at local public broadcast stations. So far the feedback has been largely positive. And it's adding new dimensions to the overall concept.
The big idea with these on-site labs is to promote organizational change (and systemic change) while aiding our adoption of new skills, new technology and new practices. I'm certainly not alone in thinking these advancements are needed quickly and massively to upgrade public media in the digital age. Deeper thinkers than I have called upon America’s mission-oriented newsrooms to pump up their capabilities, their interactivity and their journalistic ambition at a time when "the information needs of local communities" are increasingly underserved due to market-failure of the traditional news model.
The more I've worked on this innovation labs idea, the more I'm beginning to see these "labs" as "join points" -- providing stations a portal through which to link and engage with like-minded actors in the networked environment. These "join points" help mulitply the learning and speed-up discovery among stations, the public, educators, or other important stakeholders.
I explained the original lab concept here in some detail after developing it during my 2011 Knight Journalism Fellowship at Stanford. Now, I'm steering from concept to concrete proposal. This will mean tightening the focus on a key objectives and scaling down to a manageable pilot phase. And to begin talking about the operational structure and financing.
Here is a round-up of feedback received so far. This is an edited version of what has arrived by email, on social networks, via this site, and through conversations. Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to think deeply about innovation and training in public media news... and provided input on this proposal.
What the Lab "Prototype" Taught Us
I'm paraphrasing and blending information here from Leng Caloh, Deanna Martin-Mackey, Alison St. John, Amy Isackson and Nate Gibbs, all of KPBS, where we established the Jacobs Lab -- a journalistic, multi-media convergence project that became the prototype for my proposal:
"The lab became less about training specific skills and more about making a cultural shift to our organization. Changing the broadcast mindset was the harder thing to do."
"Reporters required lots of orientation in basic computer literacy. Such things as researching, surfing, bookmarking, file management, etc."
"Reporters had to 'learn how to learn' in the lab. This included time management, pacing, planning and working in teams. We also emphasized a 'reflective' approach so as to articulate expectations and note progress and cultivate patience with the process of discovery and trial-and-error."
"The convergence editor was the key to the lab's effectiveness and customized training."
"Laboratory fellows began to form a stationwide 'culture of sharing' their knowledge, their questions, their tricks or best practices."
"A self-assessment tool helped measure needs before the lab and progress achieved after the lab."
"The lab should not be an isolated place. It is better if it is integrated into the station newsroom and the convergence editor is seen as an integral part of the station editorial team. It should certainly not be seen as hindrance to anything the station is doing."
"While the lab experience requires some exemption from daily deadline pressure (if it is going to make time for new learning and special projects), it also can't be a refuge from deadline pressure or the need to produce tangible work. This requires defining expectations and setting goals and communicating well with any and all stakeholders."
"We ended the fellowship model and now 'everyone is a fellow' -- so the lab is less of a place and more of a process."
Direct Encouragement From Station Folks
Suzanne Marmion, KPBS: "Mike, excellent idea to help stations add on 'innovation labs' as a safe place to learn and play with new ideas...with the goal of helping "radio" journalists become journalists, who can work in radio and on the web (and in our case on TV, too!).
Keith Seinfeld, KPLU: "Sounds like an exciting idea, Mike. Good luck with it. When I was at MIT, I kept wondering if there was a way to replicate the energy and creativity I saw in so many of the labs there, particularly the "Fab-lab" which was for fabricating any object you could imagine. I think Stanford's i-design lab is in that same vein. So, I think I understand what you're after. I find it's hard for people to "get" the concept until they've seen it."
Ellen Rocco, North Country Public Radio: "I do think enough of us are thinking along very compatible lines... I know stations out there have told me they need some immediate infusion of training, ideas, and a little bit of money to take at least another small step with their local news efforts."
Consider a National Lab, Too
Dale Willman, Field Notes Productions: "love the idea. It is so needed in public radio. In a time when NPR
stations should be standing tall, innovating and helping to create the new media model... However, I would love to see a 'national lab' added to this proposal. The national lab is pure science, while the local labs are applied science. And as our nation once understood, there is immense value in the pure science as well. GE and IBM both created amazing things in their 'pure science' labs. My concern with the proposal is that while there is incredible value here, some of the potential for creativity will be lost in the rush to find immediate value for the station and its audience. A national lab would
remove that pressure, and allow for focused effort on the tools."
Don't Focus Solely on NPR Stations or Big Stations
Doug Mitchell, NFCB: "might I suggest that you mix up the mix...that is, yes,"NPR" stations but I can think of one or two "community stations" that should be in there too. KALW comes to mind as they are already doing what you are proposing. Also, there are two stations, WBGO and WVAS in Montgomery Alabama (part of my African-American Stations Group) that could benefit and add value to this idea too.
I think you (we) should name names....list stations that would make great incubators. Maybe 5-8? Keep it manageable, focus on real innovation, involve the National Center for Community Engagement and make sure there is strong, cultural representation.... North Carolina, Missouri, Idaho/Utah, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania (Philly in particular), WBGO in Newark NJ, KHUF in Houston"
Catherine Welch, WRNI: "Great idea as long as it isn't the same large stations getting all the goods. Be brave and invest in mid-size/small stations!"
Marion French, WXXI: "Joint licensee (TV & Radio News Production) in small to medium markets might also be interesting..."
Find a Measurement of Success
Ann Alquist, National Center for Media Engagement: "Where I think your proposal could be strengthened is by adding a metrics piece. DEI and PRPD are all interested in benchmarking and measuring impact. My pipe dream would be if NCME invested some money in creating an engagement dashboard for stations to use to track their work that would feed into our database and then into our interactive map. A girl can dream, can’t she? I can also tell you that WBEZ is bearing down on creating a metric to evaluate and assess all of their outreach and engagement efforts. PIN is also developing a dashboard for their affiliates, so it’s a hot topic and I would think a funder, like Knight or McCormick, would be eager to see a proposal that included metrics."
Link it Up Perhaps?
Jeannie Ericson, IMA Director: "I am intrigued by your concept. I am curious if you have discussed any of this with Bill Kling given his new mission in life? Also, have you considered the impact the Public Insight Network might have on this approach given your determination to include the public in the news process. I am in total agreement that the tools readily available today are game changers in the journalism process. I'd be interested in learning more about where you are going and how you are proceeding... iMA's mission is all about helping stations innovate and trying to break that broadcast mindset. Thanks for sharing!"
Beware the Bureaucracy
Nathan Gibbs, KPBS: "I think a key element is having the buy-in from all levels of management. With thin resources, it's easy for new hires to be funded by labs like this and end up a little too integrated into the newsroom; news managers need to give these fellows space to experiment and not assign a reporting load that leaves little time left to work on innovation."
There's an Opportunity for Educational Tie-In
Gary May, (Formerly with WCBE): Here are my thoughts from the 30,000-foot level. On your blog, Nathan Gibbs hits it right on the head when considering this idea in a mid- to small-market station, or a secondary station in a large market. It’s got to be considered a value-added service until the commitment is made to incorporate it into the newsroom DNA, which is easy to say, but difficult to do. I agree wholeheartedly with your assertion that these labs give us the freedom to experiment in all aspects of the idea generation/production/distribution model. I love all the bullet points you bring out in your proposal. One of the points that I think is missing is this: The foundation of good journalism is good storytelling. We have to put an effort into finding people that tell great stories, and nurture that talent. It may be someone at a poetry slam, or an open mic night, or a blogger that spins incredibly rich tales. Where I see the strongest impact of these innovation labs is training these potential new journalists. I know training is a subject near and dear to your heart, since I’ve seen postings from you on PubRadio regarding this specific topic. Since the journalism and broadcast models have been turned on their collective ear because of the Internet and the rise of the non-traditional citizen journalist, I think we need to take a serious look at how we are training the next generation of journalists. Maybe the traditional 4-year university-based system should be tossed out in favor of the apprenticeship model where on-the-job training is overseen by these innovation labs, and ultimately leads to a bachelor’s degree in ‘converged media journalism’. These efforts would be overseen by the national project director you mention, possibly in association with NPR, international media resources, select academic advisors, and local stations. When contemplating curriculum design and delivery, serious consideration should be given to the distance-learning model. Advisors in remote cities can conduct content reviews of story ideas in real time for the benefit of all ‘students’ who are logged into the training portal. Once a story has undergone a rigorous editing process and is ready for broadcast, then the local public radio station, through some kind of agreement, can broadcast the content. The story could remain the property of the student or the innovation lab, to be reversioned for release on other platforms. Once these ‘students’ matriculate from the apprenticeship, the ‘rethinking’ should continue regarding the method of employment. In what ways can the employer-employee relationship be reexamined? Is this ‘converged media journalist’ a traditional contractor for the local public station AND the local newspaper, in addition to running a blog? Do they work at the station, or do they have the freedom to work ‘from home’, wherever that may be? Stations have to be willing to explore non-traditional relationships to employees and to content in order to make this model work. NPR uses stringers all the time. Why can’t that idea be fostered out of the local public radio (or to be more hip, ‘public media’) newsroom? Finally, I think there needs to be an effort to incorporate the idea of innovation labs not only in the larger markets, but in markets of all sizes, in order to foster non-traditional newsgathering methods and non-traditional thinking throughout the public radio system. This idea will have a better chance of getting off the ground if it’s seen as the agenda for the whole system, not just a select group of major- and mid-market stations. In order for it to work for the smaller stations, maybe regional innovation hubs could be set up with the mission to help stations in specific geographic regions, especially those served by smaller stations.
Less Experimentation, More Application
Hari Sreenivasan, PBS NewsHour: "perhaps this is coming from a place of "innovation" fatigue but i'm wondering whether the priority ought now be to replicate the "what works" already, instead of creating 30 new labs. i see nieman, and media shift and okeefe at wnyc and previously rodriguez at usc... all testing out the next shiny thing and i'm trying to do that at newshour as well.. at this point i kinda need to just know whats working, how its working and how i can do it for little to no cash. its wonderful that kpbs did what it did... or wnyc did... but instead of bringin money to stations to set up skunkworks at each... how about just channeling those funds to rolling things out."
Make it More Concrete
Ken Mills, Consultant: Thanks for sharing the Innovation Labs overview. There are excellent ideas in the report, particularly the "convergence editor." To me, what you propose is not focused enough and should be more direct about action steps and benefits. First, it is about "public media" - a vague concept that is not defined in the report. Are you talking about public TV? Noncomm online news sites like Texas Tribune or MinnPost? Second, you are not specific about the platforms on which public radio news operations can/should compete. Given our scarce resources, we can't everywhere all the time. Here is what I suggest: + Step One - A research and planning phase to identify the media platforms on which public radio stations/listeners have the greatest affinity and the offer the best ways to expand service without breaking the budget. These likely include: terrestrial broadcast signals (we are there already), streaming audio simulcast of our programming (we are there already), on demand & podcasts (we are halfway there), apps designed for iPads and other tablet venues (we are just beginning), purposeful ("pull" rather than "push" use of social media -- we generally aren't using social media the way we could/should), and so on. From the research, develop a finite proirity list of what platforms are "in" and "out" for public radio news development. Then, focus on specific ideas to grow individual multi-media skills and the infrastructure to support them. THIS IS A DOABLE AND NEEDED GOAL. Stuff that will probably fall by the wayside are TV-type video, organizing engagement events, writing a textbook about new media, trying to measure "quality" of work, etc. + Step Two - A plan to take it into the field. To me, the key is to provide LEADERSHIP about the way forward, not a reflection of the current status quo. LEADERSHIP is about where we put our efforts, resources and priorities. This will require choices.
I suggest you check out the recent PRPD Webinar about "facebook 101" -- fascinating new info about the depth of usage and important reality-check perspective.
A Former Innovation Lab Fellow Speaks Up
Nicole Lozare, Former Fellow, KPBS Jacobs Lab:
“Before I became a Jacobs Fellow, I was, like a lot of journalists at that time, burnt out from the extra work brought on by shrinking newsrooms and scared to death of this “multimedia thing.” The Innovation Lab at KPBS gave me room to continue being a journalist, while at the same time affording me the time, space and resources to learn all the new story-telling tools out there. The best part was that I was still working for a live newsroom so I was able to put the new techniques into action right away. I immediately felt like a new journalist --- not one who had to wait months or some kind of graduation before entering this new technologically-based, social media-reliant world.With access to the Innovation Lab, I was revived as a journalist and I also felt that I was working for an organization that was investing in me. My employer didn’t want to just toss me out for a younger and more tech-savvy journalist. Instead, they wanted my journalism experience and they wanted to upgrade me, if you will. I was now a Journalist 2.0.
With the Innovation Lab, I learned photography and how it can better enhance your story. I learned how to put audio slideshows together. I also learned video photography. Most of all, I learned which stories benefited best from the different methods of story telling that was now part of my skill-set.
I entered the Innovation Lab as one-medium journalist and I came out as a photographer, videographer … I was suddenly 3D! I was able to reinvent myself to keep up with the times and enter a second phase in my career. I was also able to serve our listeners better by providing them with an enhanced way to experience my stories --- not just by radio, but now with photography or video.
The Innovation Lab helped me realize that I wasn’t just a journalist anymore. I am a story teller – able to tell my stories in whatever medium the story deserved and that I desired.”
Your Take?
If you have any comment or question about the innovation labs in local public media proposal, please offer that here... or contact me directly.
Thanks!
ShareThis
