Convergence vs. Intermediality: How to Approach Media Change

The concept of convergence has dominated the research and discussion on media change. The hype about the revolutionary impact of digital technology is now changing to a more critical awareness of the process-like character of convergence. The emergence of new media like the Internet didn't lead to the death of old media like radio and television. Convergence as a way to bridge or join old and new technologies, formats and audiences is central in the idea of intermediality. Where the hypothesis of convergence pointed to gaps and discontinuities between the old and new, intermediality pays more attention to  continuity of media forms and to articulation and re-articulation of the media through the change of social and cultural contexts. The argument is that the identity of any medium is dependent on interaction and interplay between different media which exercise power over each other directly, socially and culturally.

Organizer:
From convergence to intermediality: continuity and change in the development of Finnish media (Intermedia project); funded by the Academy of Finland. Department of Journalism and Mass Communication.

Programme

At 9.15
Opening: About Intermedia and Intermediality.
Taisto Hujanen, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication,
University of Tampere

At 9.30
Multimodality and the Academic Division of Labour.
Mikko Lehtonen, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication,
University of Tampere

At 10.00
How Does Convergence and Its Critique Challenge the Concept of a Medium?
Arild Fetveit, Department of Media, Cognition and Communication,
University of Copenhagen

Short Break

At 11.00
"Everybody reads the newspaper": Convergence and Political Communication.
Eli Skogerbø, Department of Media and Communication,
University of Oslo

Abstract for Arild Fetveit:
The various forms of digital phenomena can be conceptualized in a number of ways, as"media," "applications," "platforms," "delivery technologies," and more. Thus, for media studies, an era of conceptual innocence seems to have come to an end. Though introduction books to media studies would occasionally cite various definitions of key  terms like "media" and "communication," the term "medium" has to a limited degree been seen as provided a conceptual challenge to media studies. Rather, the term "medium" - with its plural "media" - has largely been naturalized both inside and  outside of the research community. It has called for tacit understanding, rather than explicit definition when used. If not the digital has "changed it all," it would seem that it has contributed to changing this. It has contributed to a transformation though which the concept of "medium" in itself has become a theoretical and conceptual challenge to media studies. The lecture aims to elucidate the problem, drawing on various examples to illustrate how the concept is used, and what examples raise challenges to current use practices.

Abstract for Eli Skogerbø:
The lecture reports hypotheses and unique findings from a new project exploring communication strategies of regional top candidates in the Norwegian Parliament Election 2009. In this election, social and online media were important communication channels alongside the print and broadcast media, in particular the regional and local newspapers. All traditional media also had online editions, and many were exploring Facebook, Twitter, blogs as part of the journalistic coverage. I have analyzed interviews with top candidates and editorial staff and journalists in regional and local media in four regions.

More information
Taisto Hujanen
Department of Journalism and Mass Communication
taisto.hujanen@uta.fi
050 395 1175