Innovation Management in Canadian Newspaper Newsrooms: Identifying Blocks and Enablers to Facilitate Digital Change
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Local newspapers have become fixtures in communities as archivists, watchdogs over people with power, and as trusted sources for information and analysis.This thesis examines the challenges newspapers face as they reinvent themselves as digital media companies.When a legacy company attempts to innovate, it will encounter a number of predictable forces that will stand between it and change.Innovation blocks are associated with newsroom culture, processes, and physical assets that have become so engrained over time that they inhibit new ways of doing things.By identifying what blocks exist, specific strategies can be developed to overcome them.This theory was applied to three Canadian newspapers that had just gone through significant innovation projects.The research provides insight into what factors blocked each of these projects along with specific strategies that were used to enable change.iii Acknowledgements For many of us working in legacy news organizations it was exciting when leaders first shared their "digital first" strategies.It meant that we would finally start meeting our potential as digital content producers.But change was slow --and I wanted to understand why.I returned to Carleton University in the fall of 2014 to complete my master's degree and attempt to answer this question.The following report is the result of that effort.This thesis benefited from the assistance of two esteemed advisors.I owe an enormous amount of gratitude to Professor Aneurin Bosley who was instrumental in crafting the research design and helping to set up case study research at both the Ottawa Citizen and Toronto Star.An equal amount of gratitude is owed to Professor Chris Waddell who stepped in as advisor for the final four months of the project.Professor Waddell provided consistently thoughtful feedback and revisions on my chapters, often within hours of receiving them.Professor Waddell's assistance in putting this project together in its final few weeks was invaluable.Professor Klaus Pohle deserves special mention for having been an un-official advisor.Professor Pohle indulged me in many conversations about my topic and had many helpful tips along the way.This project would not have been possible without the co--operation extended by the Ottawa Citizen, Toronto Star and La Presse.It was an incredible privilege to have access to these newsrooms during such an important period in their organizational history.Interview participants were generous with their time Conclusion and Key Take--Aways .............
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,016 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».