|
Newsroom Tools for Computer-Assisted Reporting in 1995
Bruce Garrison
School of Communication
University of Miami
Coral Gables, FL 33124-2030
305-284-2846 (v) and 305-284-3648 (f)
[log in to unmask]
A paper submitted for judging to the Communication Technology and Policy
Division of AEJMC for presentation at Anaheim, Calif, August, 1996.
Newsroom Tools for Computer-Assisted Reporting in 1995
A paper submitted for judging to the Communication Technology and Policy
Division of AEJMC for presentation at Anaheim, Calif, August, 1996.
Newsroom Tools for Computer-Assisted Reporting in 1995
ABSTRACT
This paper focuses on hardware and software tools used in newspapers for
computer-assisted reporting in 1994 and 1995. The findings are based on two
national mail surveys of daily newspapers. The study found hardware and software
differences were significant in terms of the size of the newspaper and its
available resources. Among the most popular resources in 1995 were 486-type
processors, DOS/Windows, 14.4-Kbps modems, Procomm Plus, XyWrite, Excel, and
Paradox and FoxPro. There was slight growth in the limited-use of analytical
mapping, statistical packages, programming tools, and personal information /
text database managers.
Newsroom Tools for Computer-Assisted Reporting in 1995
For several decades, the only computers available when needed for newsgathering
were the large systems known as mainframe computers. These are the highest-level
computing systems that can handle the most difficult and largest of processing
tasks. Traditionally, mainframe systems were used by larger institutions such as
corporations, educational facilities, government agencies, the military, and
research centers. These costly systems are designed for multiple users through
time sharing. Mainframes are also most often associated with nine-track tapes,
the storage tapes used for data generated and analyzed on mainframe system
reel-to-reel magnetic tape drives.
For newspapers and other mass media, mainframe systems were primarily used in
the 1950s through the 1970s for purposes mostly outside the newsroom. Companies
large enough to have their own mainframe systems, such as metropolitan dailies,
wire services, and networks, often used the mainframes for accounting, billing,
customer record keeping, and other business purposes. In the 1970s, some news
companies began to use them for production-oriented activities such as
typesetting in "cold-type" systems (Garrison, 1983). But these mainframe and
mini computers, as powerful as they can be, were rarely used as newsgathering
tools. At some enlightened newspapers in the 1960s and 1970s, mainframes were
used for occasional data processing and analysis, but mainly for special
projects such as analysis of political poll data (Meyer, 1979; Reavy, 1996). A
few database-oriented projects produced from government data copied onto
nine-track tape appeared during this era, but these were extremely rare
(Garrison, 1995; Reavy, 1996).
Desktop computing began to appear in the early 1980s. As these more affordable
computers became more powerful, applications that had been previously reserved
for mainframes began to appear. Gradually, into the 1990s, PCs, especially
networked PCs, began to replace mainframes. And slowly, use of desktop computers
in newsrooms increased since PCs were easier to use and affordable for all
levels of newsgathering.
The result has been a decline in mainframe use around the world, especially in
government data collection that previously depended on mainframes or mini
computers. At the same time, there has even been a decline in use of mainframes
by journalists for news stories. In the mid 1990s, only the largest of databases
still required mainframes. A recent massive traffic analysis of 16.2 million
Texas driver records and 3.7 million driving citations completed by the Houston
Chronicle is an example of a project that still cannot be handled by desktop
systems (Hunt, 1995).
At large daily newspapers, large news magazines, the television networks, and
those other news media with national or large regional coverage areas, projects
involve databases and analysis of millions of records, hundreds of variables or
fields, and multiple data tables. USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, and U.S.
News & World Report, for example, regularly use computers for certain projects
but must produce stories with a national perspective. Their CAR specialists
routinely use extraordinarily large databases (Garrison, 1996; Garrison, 1995;
Loeb, 1995).
The incredible growth of desktop systems since about 1980 is widely discussed
and known (Garrison, 1995; Reavy, 1996). In the past decade, there has also been
a rapid growth in the use of portable PCs. In fact, most market studies show
portables--- with their increasing power and speed--- taking a larger share of
the total number of PCs sold each year in this decade. PCs operating MS-DOS and
Windows dominated the world's computer industry sales each year. Yet, despite
that dominance, some journalists prefer other computers such as Macintoshes for
their newsroom work. Smaller news organizations, for instance, often have entire
newsrooms based around Macintosh computers. At news organizations using MS-DOS
based PCs, it is common in some graphics or advertising departments to find a
room full of Macintosh computers. Some small publishing companies that produce
newsletters and other forms of printed mass communication also prefer Macintosh
computers.
Use of computers in basic newsgathering -- commonly known as computer-assisted
reporting - has been growing in this decade. Journalists use computers to
connect to others through online resources and they use computers for database
analysis in ways in which mainframe computers were once associated. But there
may be important differences in the ability to use computers in reporting at
some newspapers. Earlier research on uses of computers in newsgathering has
determined that variation in computer use exists because not all newspapers use
computers in the same way or even use them at all. One of the major distinctions
exists between large and small newspapers. "[S]mall newspapers lag far behind
large and medium-sized ones in newsroom computerization," Brooks and Yang (1993,
p. 16) concluded.
The present study focused on determining what computer tools were in use in 1995
in daily newspaper newsrooms in the United States. A second area of focused on
whether newspaper size, measured by Sunday circulation, was a factor in use of
CAR and its tools. Generally, the study sought to answer these research
questions:
1. What are the characteristics of personal computer hardware in use for
computer-assisted reporting?
2. What are the types of personal computer software in use for
computer-assisted reporting?
3. What differences in large and small daily newspapers' use of hardware and
software exist?
4. What changes in use of CAR tools have occurred from early 1994 to early
1995?
THE STUDY METHOD
An on-going national study of the development and use of computer-assisted
reporting has been underway at the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla.,
since 1993. To begin the project, a national database of newspapers, managing
editors, and CAR supervisors was built. From the database, an initial mailing of
514 cover letters, questionnaires, and stamped, self-addressed envelopes was
sent to the nation's largest Sunday and daily newspapers in late December 1993.
One follow-up mailing was sent in late January 1994. Circulation of minimum
20,000 on Sundays was used as the cutoff point to control research costs.
In late December 1994, the second data collection wave began with a mailing to
510 Sunday and daily newspapers. Again, a circulation minimum of 20,000 on
Sundays was the minimum for inclusion in the population. Two follow-up mailings
were sent. The first follow-up was mailed in early February 1995 and the second
was sent in mid March 1995. In 1994, a total of 208 responses were received, a
response rate of 41 percent. In 1995, a total of 287 responses were received, a
response rate of 56 percent. Since the two waves of this study involved
surveying an entire population, significance tests are not reported. Circulation
figures were obtained from the latest available edition of the Editor &
Publisher International Year Book (Anderson, 1994; Anderson, 1995). To simplify
data presented below, "missing" and "none" responses to questions were combined.
In many cases, it was apparent from the response patterns of some respondents
that no response to a question was equivalent to no use.
One possible explanation for the jump in participation level is general
involvement in at least one of the two major forms of CAR. In 1994, perhaps,
more newspapers were not involved in any type of CAR and did not have anything
to report. Despite pleas to respond to the survey even if there was no CAR at a
newspaper, many respondents chose not to reply. The increase in participation in
1995 reflected a spurt in growth in involvement, even at the most basic level.
Editors were asked either to complete the questionnaire themselves or to forward
it to the person in charge of online news research and computer-assisted
reporting. In some cases, as many as two or three persons completed various
portions of the questionnaire related to their newsroom specializations.
Questionnaires were developed from discussions and interviews during the
Investigative Reporters and Editors and National Institute for Computer-Assisted
Reporting conferences on Computer-Assisted Reporting at Raleigh, N.C., in
October 1993 and in San Jose, Calif., in October 1994. The instruments consisted
of four sets of questions including institutional and personal information,
computer-assisted reporting, online news research, and field reporting use of
computers.
The median daily circulation of the 287 newspapers responding in 1995 was 52,800
copies. Therefore, small newspapers were categorized as those with circulations
under 52,800 and large newspapers were categorized as those over 52,800. In most
cases, variables in the 1995 study phase are reported in contingency tables by
circulation size. Data from the two surveys were processed using programs from
the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows, Version 6.1.3
(Norusis, 1995).
HARDWARE AND OPERATING SYSTEMS FINDINGS
With the decline of mainframe systems, which PC desktop systems were most used
for CAR? This study measured the usage of processors, operating systems, and
other critical hardware. In Table 1, the most commonly used processor for CAR
stories or projects was a 80486-type processor that has been on the market since
1993. A total of 43% of all newspapers responding to the question used "486s" in
1995. In 1995, only a handful of newsrooms (3%) used the "Pentium" processor. A
little more than one in nine newspapers used any type of Macintosh computer for
CAR (12%) and another one in ten still used older 80386 processors for CAR. The
differences in small and large newspapers were striking when processors were
considered. Larger newspapers, for example, rarely used Macintoshes for CAR but
were widely known to use them for production of graphics. Almost one-quarter of
smaller newspapers used them for their CAR work. In fact, it was the
second-largest category of processor for the smaller dailies and only by a small
margin. This suggests that most small newspapers used their hardware for more
than one purpose.
Table 2 reveals changes in processors used for CAR in 1994 and 1995. As shown,
there was some evidence of upgrading for CAR, moving slowly toward high-end
processors such as 80486s and 80586 Pentiums. Perhaps an important observation
is that there continued to be a wide range of processors in use, with no
apparent shifts in any particular direction between the 1994 and 1995 studies.
Operating systems
For CAR applications, the most-used operating system in 1995 was a combined DOS
and Windows set up. More than half of the newspapers responding to the question
(52%) reported using DOS with Windows, as shown in Table 3. The combination
referred to either basic Windows Ver. 3.x or Windows for Work Groups Ver. 3.11,
or any other version of Windows. Since the data in the 1995 survey were
collected early in the year, prior to the debut of the large Windows 95 beta
program or the final release of the product, the newest form of Windows was not
considered in the study. Beyond DOS and Windows, there were other OSs in use,
but none in any notable proportions. About 7% of newspapers responding reported
using DOS only, interestingly, an artifact of slower and older hardware, it
appeared. There were meaningful differences in small and large newspapers also,
most likely due to the greater proportion of small newspapers using Macintosh
systems.
Table 4 shows the shifts in use of operating systems / platforms between 1994
and 1995. The change that was most noticeable was movement from DOS only to DOS
/ Windows. Use of DOS / Windows rose from 22% to 42% in a single year, while
DOS-only users dropped almost 9% to 6%. These numbers reflected the national
shift in use of DOS-only software for data analysis to Windows-based programs
that had been introduced about two years earlier.
Compact disc drives
One of the hardware peripherals that has rapidly grown in use because of its
ability to store large amounts of data is the compact-disc drive. Beginning in
1995, most new desktop systems were sold with them installed internally in the
desktop box and, in 1996, most new portables offered CD-ROM, as well. This was
due in part to the large storage capacity and use of CDs for multi-media
systems. The most common type is CD-ROM, which is a read-only storage drive. In
1995, CD-ROM drives were becoming more common in newsrooms. In the 1995 survey,
Table 5 shows more than half of the newspapers reported using one or more CD-ROM
drives. A total of 38% reported using one CD-ROM drive and another 33% reported
using two or more CD-ROM drives, or more than 71% used a CD-ROM drive in some
CAR capacity. As with other hardware examined in the study in 1995, there were
important differences in large and small newspapers. Large dailies typically
have more than one CD-ROM drive while smaller dailies were more likely to have
only one drive--- and that one was often shared, several responses indicated---
and a much larger proportion had none.
Table 6 shows that 39% of reporting newspapers used one or more CD-ROM drives in
newsrooms in 1994 and 58% in 1995. This reflects growth from 4% to 27% of
newspapers with two or more CD-ROM drives and a decline from 36% to 31% in the
number of newsrooms with CD-ROMs in use for CAR.
Other critical CAR hardware
Hard drive capacities were growing in 1995. Modem speeds and capabilities to fax
were increasing. More storage was required and different media for storage were
being used. These were the trends in hardware. Additional CAR hardware findings
include:
* Hard drive manufacturers in 1995 and 1996 were making larger and faster
drives and, at the same time, lowering prices. This meant that newsrooms using
personal computers for CAR had greater capacity available to them. And some were
taking advantage of the newer drives. The mean hard drive size is over a
gigabyte (1,055 MB) in 1995. The sizes reported ranged from a 20 MB drive still
in use to a 10 GB drive on a server. The most frequent reported sizes in early
1995 were 1 GB (10%), 500 MB drives (5%), and 2 GB (4%). A year earlier, the
mean hard drive size was 853 MB for reporting newspapers. The sizes ranged from
a 20 MB drive in use to a 6.7 GB server in use for CAR.
* There has been a shift in modems required by online users in newsrooms. The
data transmission needs of World Wide Web, other Internet services, and
commercial online service users have forced news organizations to upgrade
modems. In late 1994 and early 1995, the industry standard was still 14.4-Kbps,
but it was changing to 28.8 Kbps at the time of the 1995 survey, and slower
newsroom modems were rapidly being replaced. Table 7 displays modem speeds in
1995. The most popular modem speed for those responding to the question in 1995
was 14.4-Kbps (49%) and 9.6-Kbps (22%), but 11% had 28.8-Kbps and about 2% used
57.6-Kbps or faster connections. Perhaps differences in large and small
newspapers' resources are evident in the speeds most often used. There were
interesting differences by circulation size and, as Table 7 shows, the
proportions were one or more modem generations of faster speeds for larger
dailies.
* Much CAR that involves databases requires use of storage media beyond hard
drives and floppy diskettes. While this might be acceptable for some databases
and some projects, larger databases or limited capacities of hard drives require
users to find alternatives for storage. Table 8 shows digital tape (31%) to be
the most popular form of storage among those responding, but it should be noted
that an even larger percentage, 38%, did not use additional storage media.
Optical disks were also in use by about 9% of the responding newspapers and
another 16% reported other forms of storage such as nine-track tape, Zip drives,
Bernoulli drives, and various forms of CD-ROM drives. Again, there were
noticeable differences in large and small newspapers and how each handled data
storage problems. A much larger proportion of smaller newspapers had no
additional storage media in use than larger dailies, although digital tape was
the storage of choice when it is used. Regardless of what is in use, it seemed
clear that if new storage technology develops, the database people in newsrooms
check it out.
CAR SOFTWARE FINDINGS
Word processing
There are a variety of word management tools, including word processors. As
shown in Table 9, XyWrite (27%) remained the most-used word processor and text
editor in newsrooms responding, but Microsoft Word (20%) and Novell WordPerfect
(14%) were becoming more common as newsrooms moved to PC-based systems and
adopted the leading office software suites. Diversity in word processing seemed
to be the growing trend, however. There were notable usage differences that
occurred when looking at preferences by newspaper size. XyWrite, Word, and
WordPerfect were the top three, in order, for all newspapers, but smaller
newspapers tended to use other word processors such as those used exclusively on
Macintosh computers.
Table 10 shows changes in word processor use from 1994 to 1995. Perhaps the most
meaningful changes were brought about by shifts from "missing" to that of a
particular word processor. This could have been caused by respondents who did
not know the type of proprietary software in use. More respondents knew what was
in use in 1995 and reported it. Clearly, there was a shift toward PC-based
software such as Microsoft Word, but almost all individual categories increased
slightly.
Spreadsheets
Many journalists venturing into the quantitative side of CAR for the first time
do so with a spreadsheet program. Spreadsheets have considerable database
building and computational power and provide a solid base for fast learning.
Because users can learn the basics of database construction and data processing
with a spreadsheet program, and because spreadsheets also offer a variety of
database manipulation features such as formulas, sorting, advanced bivariate and
multivariate statistics, they are ideal for beginners.
Table 11 shows that Microsoft's Excel had become the dominant spreadsheet (31%
of those who reported using spreadsheets), but many journalists also used 1-2-3
(20%) and Quattro Pro (17%). However, noticeable proportions did not use
spreadsheets or did not respond. The single-greatest difference in large and
small daily newspaper use of spreadsheets was not so much the products selected
as the use of spreadsheets at all. A total of 33% of smaller dailies did not use
spreadsheets while only 8% of larger dailies did not use them.
Table 12 displays the growth of Excel as the favorite spreadsheet. Excel's use
grew from 17% to 26% in a single year, while Novell's Quattro Pro and Lotus
1-2-3 grew very little. The fact that there was a 16% drop in "missing / none"
responses in the single year indicated more awareness of products in use as well
as more use of spreadsheets that began in the past year. The growth of "none" in
use was a reflection of more specific answers provided. It is assumed that many
of the respondents that would have reported none in 1994 simply did not answer
the question.
Relational database managers
For news organizations already using spreadsheets and those needing to go beyond
analysis of data in single tables, more advanced tools exist. These include
relational database management systems, also called relational database
programs. These are popular for what is commonly called "database journalism."
Table 13 reveals that in 1995, Borland Paradox was the preferred (24%) software
among those responding, but Microsoft's FoxPro (21%) was also widely used.
Another Microsoft relational database program, Access, was growing in popularity
as part of the Microsoft Office suite's "Professional" edition, was used by 5%
in 1995. There were strong differences in database software use by size of
newspaper, but as was the case with spreadsheets, the most glaring difference
was in use. Almost half of the small dailies, 47%, did not use the tool. Only
11% of the larger dailies in 1995 did not use a relational database program.
Table 14 shows most product use categories increased slightly, but FoxPro
experienced the most growth, from 12% to 18% in a year.
Analytical mapping
Analytical mapping tools were high on the wish lists of many CAR supervisors.
Many newspapers, so far in the mid 1990s, have added numerous software tools to
their CAR resources, but mapping programs had not yet gained widespread use. One
of the major reasons, until recently, had been the high cost of the software.
Some producers lowered their prices in 1994 and 1995 from original levels that
often exceeded $1,000 per product. Most newspapers (71% of those responding to
the question) were not yet using computer mapping products, Table 15
demonstrates. But the decrease in this figure shows signs of some growth in use.
Of those newsrooms using geographic information systems (GIS) software, MapInfo
(15%) and Atlas GIS (9%) were the most widely used. There were also differences
in use by size. Larger newspapers (43%) used the product far more than smaller
ones (10%). Table 16 shows changes in mapping software use between 1994 and
1995. MapInfo gained in use, from about 5% to 12%, while Atlas GIS did not
change in proportion of use.
Statistical packages
Another growth area is use of packages designed for advanced statistical
analysis. As analytical demands for CAR projects grow, so does the
sophistication of software. However, not many newspapers (just 16% of those
responding to the question) used statistical software in 1995, as shown in Table
17. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was the most popular
CAR statistics tool with 9% use. The Statistical Analysis System (SAS), 3%, and
others, 4%, were used by only a few daily newspapers. The differences in large
and small newspapers were again characterized by the nature of CAR projects and
the need for the most powerful analytical tools, as well as the abilities of
staff members to use these tools. Smaller newspapers (3%) did not use
statistical packages often. By comparison, 27% of larger newspapers used them.
Table 18 shows virtually no change in use of statistical software during
1994-95.
Text database and personal information managers
Specialized database programs called personal information managers (PIMs) are
perhaps best for handling an individual's data needs. There are also a handful
of text database programs that can be used to mimic many of the features of PIMs
and complete other important tasks. While information management tools make
sense for reporters and editors to use, they had not found their way into
newsrooms in 1995 in any substantial levels, Table 19 indicates. But there was
some growth, as Table 20 shows. In 1994, 93% did not use PIMs or text managers,
compared to 79% a year later. askSam was used by 2% of respondents in that year.
Use of askSam grew about 7%, but use of other products was minimal.
Software development and programming
Perhaps the highest level of computer literacy achieved in newsrooms is
competent programming to customize computing needs. There are numerous software
development and programming tools and they vary in complexity and computing
power. Regardless, most journalists involved in CAR do not program. Some of the
most sophisticated users did some original programming, but these were a very
small group in newspaper newsrooms, data in Table 21 show. Twenty percent of
newsrooms in 1995 used original programming software. Microsoft Basic (5% of
those responding) and Microsoft's newer Visual Basic (4%) were gaining some use.
As with most of the other software products discussed, there were differences in
use according to the size of the newspaper. Programming tools, the limited use
of them noted already, were almost exclusively the province of larger
newspapers. While 28% of larger newspapers used some form of programming
software, only 10% of smaller dailies used them.
Table 22 shows minimal growth in use of development and programming tools from
1994 to 1995. There was a small amount of growth in using Basic and Visual
Basic. But many CAR journalists who did programming typically use the macros of
their spreadsheet or database programs and these uses were not measured.
Communications software
For CAR that involves online research, E-mail, accessing tools available on a
remote computer system, or even filing a story, a communications package is
essential. As shown in Table 23, Procomm Plus dominated newsroom preferences. In
1995, about 45% of newsrooms that answered the question use Procomm Plus. All
other programs -- such as Crosstalk, Windows Terminal, Smartcom, and others --
constitute only about 39% of the respondents. However, one in six newspapers,
16%, did not use any communications software. As with other software, use of
communications packages was a function of size. The primary difference, again,
was not as much in the product used as it was whether the category of product
was used. While only 6% of larger dailies did not use a communications package,
30% of the smaller dailies did not use communication software. While Procomm was
the favorite product of larger dailies, other products, such as those designed
for Macintosh computers, were more often favored by smaller dailies. Table 24
shows there was not much change in terms of communications software used. With
no breakthrough products introduced, there were some minor shifts.
What tools do CAR journalists want?
In 1995, what sort of hardware tools did news organizations hope to acquire?
Table 25 shows CAR hardware and software wish lists in 1995. The most common
preference was for new personal computers. It was often the complaint that there
were either not enough or no computers devoted to CAR. In some cases,
individuals wanted both new computers and upgraded existing systems.
Of the 172 newspapers reporting wish lists in 1995, new computers were at the
top of the list for almost 8%. Another 6% sought upgrades for existing desktop
computers, pointing to a considerable hardware stress problem at almost one
quarter of the newspapers. Third on the list, also about 6%, was analytic
mapping software. Internet access or improved Internet access (e.g., World Wide
Web) was fourth at about 5% of the newspapers. Another hardware upgrade, adding
a CD-ROM drive, was fifth with about 4% of respondents seeking one or more
drives.
A wide range of other hardware items followed. These included such items as
nine-track drives, local area networks for both CAR computers and the entire
newsroom, additional RAM, optical disk drives, and new work stations. Software
preferences included relational database programs, programming tools for
relational database programs, and statistical packages. Yet some news
organizations simply sought basics such as spreadsheets, online services, and
databases.
The top general category software was high-end analytical software. The second
overall choice was one such tool -- analytical mapping software such as MapInfo
or Atlas GIS. It was a first preference by 6%. Improved access to the Internet,
which included updating World Wide Web browsers and access connections, was
fourth. Database packages constituted a variety of preferences also, including
such things as "any database package" or specific relational database programs
such as FoxPro by name, Access, or Paradox. Visual Basic also rated high. Some
news organizations sought spreadsheet software upgrades, acquisition of
statistical packages, text database managers, scanner software to accompany
scanners -- presumably for data entry -- and data visualization software.
CONCLUSIONS
Journalism is in a period of technological transition in this decade.
Information gathering, an important part of the job of any journalist, is being
re-invented. Use of computer tools in the past decade for news reporting has
improved as availability of less-expensive tools has increased. The result is a
new approach to newsgathering that has emerged in the middle of this decade. The
spread of CAR is apparent in the data presented from this study. There was
growth in the proportion of newspapers using CAR. There was also evidence of the
increased sophistication of CAR among newspapers already using CAR.
Perhaps one of the most significant observations is that journalism is not
controlling its own destiny with computer technology. There is no doubt that the
computer industry determines the direction of business and home computing in the
nation. News organizations, like other businesses, are at the mercy of the
computer industry since news companies rarely develop their own hardware or
substantial software used in CAR. There are occasions when news businesses have
developed computer tools for other purposes, such as pagination and archiving.
If any CAR programming is done, it is front-end programming for databases.
Original software, such as Elliot Jaspin's Nine Track Express, is an exception
instead of the rule. Rarely do news companies fund development of original
computer hardware.
The introduction of Windows 95 last August caused numerous discussions in
newsrooms and in newspaper information systems departments about possible use.
If the decision was made to upgrade, then decisions related to upgrading
hardware followed. It could be argued that some of the Fortune 500 corporations
may have had significant influence on Microsoft's programmers as they developed
Windows 95 and its various features. But it is also safe to assume that most
news companies, the wire services, the television networks, and news magazines,
were not significantly involved. There is little software and hardware in the PC
market that is developed exclusively for the news business simply because of the
high research and development costs involved, and few news companies see the
investment worthwhile. It seems likely that use of the Internet's World Wide Web
for distribution of the news product will change this to a large degree.
Some journalists recognize the influences of the computer industry on
newsgathering, but most do not. Some feel that this impact is not so noteworthy.
It is certainly important to note that larger news companies have developed
their own software products, or had custom development done for them, for daily
uses outside of CAR such as pagination and archiving. It is very difficult, if
not impossible, to identify a computer-based product that was developed for news
use that eventually wound up in use by the general corporate world or the public
in general.
Journalists adapt these CAR tools to the best of their abilities. In recent
years, software companies have developed upgraded products that offer more and
more customizability. This helps journalists with specific applications of these
products in mind and provides a mechanism for individualizing these applications
for particular newsroom uses, such as ease in data entry or speed in data
retrieval or report printing. Despite this, perception of the impact of the
computer industry on CAR is mixed.
A handful of respondents in both 1994 and 1995 remarked on open-ended questions
that computers and CAR approaches offer a "leveling" device among the reporting
resources of large and small newspapers. Perhaps this is so, once small
newspapers obtain the hardware, software, data, and expertise to become involved
in CAR on a regular basis. But the data presented here demonstrate that there
are still considerable differences in CAR resources used by large and small
newspapers participating in this study. A small newspaper with the right CAR
tools and people on staff to use them can, of course, produce strong daily
stories and special projects. But CAR can be expensive, especially for online
services, for a news organization on a tight budget. And the effect of
"leveling" cannot occur at a newspaper that has not invested in the various
resources needed CAR on either a special project or routine reporting basis.
One of the shortcomings of this study was that it did not include the two-thirds
of U.S. daily newspapers that have circulations of fewer than 20,000 on Sundays
or did not publish a Sunday edition. It would seem to be important to
investigate use levels and reasons for lack of use of CAR at these newspapers.
Such a project would give a much more complete and appropriate look at all
newspapers, especially since CAR usage was beginning to expand in smaller news
organizations in 1995. Ideally, and it is within realistic expectations, such a
study of computer use and hardware/software configurations for newsgathering
would also include broadcast news outlets, news and other major magazines, and
news-oriented subscription newsletters.
TABLE 1: Processors, 1995
Large Small Totals
Type of PC dailies* dailies**
processor in
use _____________________________________________________________________
80486-type 75 57.3% 24 24.2% 99 43.0%
Other 31 23.7 19 19.2 50 21.7
Macintosh 5 3.8 23 23.2 28 12.2
80386-type 11 8.4 12 12.1 23 10.0
None 1 0.8 13 13.1 14 6.1
Pentium 5 3.8 2 2.0 7 3.0
80286- or 8088-type 1 0.8 5 5.1 6 2.6
Don't know 2 1.5 0 0.0 2 0.9
Unix 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 0.4
______________________________________________________________
Totals 131 57.0% 99 43.0% 230 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 57
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 2: Processors, 1994-95
Percentage
Type of PC 1994 1995 Change
processor in
use ____________________________________________________________________
586 Pentium 2 1.0% 7 2.4% +1.4%
486 64 30.8 99 34.5 +3.7
386 21 10.1 23 8.0 -2.1
286 or 8088 4 1.9 6 2.1 +0.2
Macintosh 18 8.7 28 9.8 +1.1
Other 31 14.9 50 17.4 +2.5
Missing / don't know / none 68 32.7 74 25.8 - 6.9
_____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 3: Operating Systems, 1995
Large Small Totals
Primary CAR operating Dailies* dailies**
system/platform in
use _____________________________________________________________
DOS/Windows 89 64.5% 32 33.7% 121 51.9%
Other 29 21.0 16 16.8 45 19.3
None 11 8.0 18 18.9 29 12.4
DOS only 5 3.6 11 11.6 16 6.9
Macintosh 0 0.0 13 13.7 13 5.6
Don't know 1 0.7 3 3.2 4 1.7
OS/2 2 1.4 1 1.1 3 1.3
Unix 1 0.7 1 1.1 2 0.9
_______________________________________________________________
Totals 138 59.2% 95 40.8% 233 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 54
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 4: Operating Systems, 1994-95
Percentage
Primary CAR operating 1994 1995 Change
system/platform in
use _____________________________________________________________
DOS/Windows 45 21.6% 121 42.2% +20.6
Other 10 4.8 45 15.7 + 9.9
DOS only 30 14.4 16 5.6 - 8.8
Macintosh 8 3.8 13 4.5 + 0.7
Don't know 0 0.0 4 1.4 + 1.4
OS/2 5 2.4 3 1.0 - 1.4
Unix 0 0.0 2 0.7 + 0.7
None / Missing 110 52.9 83 28.9 -23.0
_____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 5: CD-ROM Drive, 1995
Large Small Totals
CD-ROM drives dailies* dailies**
of some type in
use ______________________________________________________________
One in newsroom 52 37.7% 37 38.5% 89 38.0%
Two or more 67 48.6 11 11.5 78 33.3
None 17 12.3 45 46.9 62 26.5
Other 2 1.4 3 3.1 5 2.1
______________________________________________________________
Totals 138 59.0% 96 41.0% 234 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 53
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 6: CD-ROM Drive Use, 1994-95
Percentage
CD-ROM drives 1994 1995 Change
of some type in use ____________________________________________________________
One in newsroom 74 35.6% 89 31.0% - 4.6%
Two or more 8 3.8 78 27.2 +23.4
Other 0 0.0 5 1.7 + 1.7
Missing / none 126 60.6 115 40.1 -20.5
____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 7: Modem Speeds in Use, 1995
Large Small Totals
Modem Kbps dailies* dailies**
speed in use _____________________________________________________________
14.4 74 56.1% 26 35.1% 100 48.5%
9.6 26 19.7 19 25.7 45 21.8
2.4 12 9.1 16 21.6 28 13.6
28.8 18 13.6 4 5.4 22 10.7
1.2 0 0.0 6 8.1 6 2.9
57.6 2 1.5 2 2.7 4 1.9
0.3 0 0.0 1 1.4 1 0.5
______________________________________________________________
Totals 132 64.1% 74 35.9% 206 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 81
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 8: Data Storage Media, 1995
Large Small Totals
Type of data dailies* dailies**
storage media ______________________________________________________________
None 34 26.0% 51 55.4% 85 38.1%
Digital tape 55 42.0 15 16.3 70 31.4
Other 25 19.1 11 12.0 36 16.1
Optical disk 12 9.2 7 7.6 19 8.5
Don't know 5 3.8 8 8.7 13 5.8
______________________________________________________________
Totals 131 58.7% 92 41.3% 223 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 64
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 9: Word Processors, 1995
Large Small Totals
Word processor dailies* dailies**
_____________________________________________________________
Other 29 21.2% 42 38.5% 71 28.9%
XyWrite 41 29.9 26 23.9 67 27.2
Microsoft Word 32 23.4 17 15.6 49 19.9
Novell WordPerfect 24 17.5 11 10.1 35 14.2
None 7 5.1 12 11.0 19 7.7
Lotus Word Pro 4 2.9 1 0.9 5 2.0
______________________________________________________________
Totals 137 55.7% 109 44.3% 246 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 41
Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 10: Word Processors, 1994-95
Percentage
Word processor 1994 1995 Change
____________________________________________________________
Other 36 17.3% 71 24.7% +7.4%
XyWrite 48 23.1 67 23.3 +0.2
Microsoft Word 12 5.8 49 17.1 +11.3
Novell WordPerfect 15 7.2 35 12.2 +5.0
Lotus Word Pro 5 2.4 5 1.7 - 0.7
Missing / none 92 44.2 60 20.9 -23.3
____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 11: Spreadsheets, 1995
Large Small Totals
Spreadsheet dailies* dailies**
______________________________________________________________
Microsoft Excel 45 33.3% 29 27.1% 74 30.6%
Lotus 1-2-3 28 20.7 21 19.6 49 20.2
None 11 8.1 35 32.7 46 19.0
Novell Quattro Pro 32 23.7 9 8.4 41 16.9
Other 19 14.1 13 12.1 32 13.2
_______________________________________________________________
Totals 135 55.8% 107 44.2% 242 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 45
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 12: Spreadsheets, 1994-95
Percentage
1994 1995 Change
Spreadsheet ____________________________________________________________
Microsoft Excel 35 16.8% 74 25.8% + 9.0%
Lotus 1-2-3 34 16.3 49 17.1 + 0.8
Novell Quattro Pro 27 13.0 41 14.3 + 1.3
Other 12 5.8 32 11.1 + 5.3
Missing / none 100 48.1 91 31.7 -16.4
___________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 13: Database Management Systems, 1995
Large Small Totals
Database manage- dailies* dailies**
ment system ______________________________________________________________
None 15 10.9% 48 47.1% 63 26.4%
Borland Paradox 41 29.9 16 15.7 57 23.8
Microsoft FoxPro 37 27.0 14 13.7 51 21.3
Other 30 21.9 12 11.8 42 17.6
Microsoft Access 9 6.6 4 3.9 13 5.4
Borland dBase 4 2.9 4 3.9 8 3.3
Lotus Approach 1 0.7 4 3.9 5 2.1
______________________________________________________________
Totals 137 57.3% 102 42.7% 239 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 48
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 14: Database Management Systems, 1994-95
Percentage
Database manage- 1994 1995 Change
ment system ___________________________________________________________________
Borland Paradox 41 19.7% 57 19.9% + 0.2%
Microsoft FoxPro 25 12.0 51 17.8 + 5.8
Other 22 10.6 42 14.6 + 4.0
Microsoft Access 2 1.0 13 4.5 + 3.5
Borland dBase 10 4.8 8 2.8 - 2.0
Lotus Approach ---- ---- 5 1.7 -----
Missing / none 108 52.0 111 38.7 -13.3
__________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 15: Analytical Mapping, 1995
Large Small Totals
Mapping dailies* dailies**
programs ______________________________________________________________
None 76 56.7% 95 89.6% 171 71.3%
MapInfo 31 23.1 4 3.8 35 14.6
Atlas GIS 20 14.9 2 1.9 22 9.2
Other 7 5.2 5 4.7 12 5.0
______________________________________________________________
Totals 134 55.8% 106 44.2% 240 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 47
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 16: Analytical Mapping, 1994-95
Percentage
Mapping 1994 1995 Change
programs ____________________________________________________________
MapInfo 10 4.8% 35 12.2% + 7.4%
Atlas GIS 16 7.7 22 7.7 0.0
Other 9 4.3 12 4.2 - 0.1
Missing / none 173 83.2 218 76.0 - 7.2
____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 17: Statistical Packages, 1995
Large Small Totals
Statistical dailies* dailies**
package _____________________________________________________________________
None 97 72.9% 104 97.2% 201 83.8%
SPSS 20 15.0 1 0.9 21 8.8
Other 8 6.0 2 1.9 10 4.2
SAS 8 6.0 0 0.0 8 3.3
______________________________________________________________
Totals 133 55.4% 107 44.6% 240 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 47
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 18: Statistical Packages, 1994-95
Percentage
Statistical 1994 1995 Change
package ________________________________________________________________________
__
SPSS 15 7.2% 21 7.3% + 0.1%
Other 10 4.8 10 3.5 - 1.3
SAS 5 2.4 8 2.8 + 0.4
Missing / none 178 85.6 248 86.4 + 0.8
___________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 19: Text Databases / Personal Information Managers, 1995
Large Small Totals
Text editor, PIM dailies* dailies**
______________________________________________________________
None 88 67.2% 88 83.8% 176 74.6%
askSam 21 16.0 4 3.8 25 10.6
Other 16 12.2 8 7.6 24 10.2
Lotus Organizer 4 3.1 5 4.8 9 3.8
Lotus Smartext 2 1.5 0 0.0 2 0.8
______________________________________________________________
Totals 131 55.5% 105 44.5% 236 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 51
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 20: Text Databases / PIMs, 1994-95
Percentage
Text editor, PIM 1994 1995 Change
____________________________________________________________
askSam 4 1.9% 25 8.7% + 6.8%
Other 10 4.8 24 8.4 + 3.6
Lotus Organizer 1 0.5 9 3.1 + 2.6
Lotus Smartext ---- ---- 2 0.1 -----
Missing / none 193 92.8 228 79.1 -13.7
____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 21: Development Tools, 1995
Large Small Totals
Development dailies* dailies**
tools ______________________________________________________________
None 90 72.0% 92 90.2% 182 80.2%
Other 14 11.2 5 4.9 19 8.4
Microsoft Basic 9 7.2 3 2.9 12 5.3
Microsoft Visual Basic 8 6.4 1 1.0 9 4.0
Borland C++ 3 2.4 1 1.0 4 1.8
Borland Turbo Pascal 1 0.8 0 0.0 1 0.4
______________________________________________________________
Totals 125 55.1% 102 44.9% 227 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 60
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 22: Development Tools, 1994-95
Percentage
Development 1994 1995 Change
tools _____________________________________________________________
Other 13 6.3% 19 6.6% + 0.3%
Microsoft Basic 2 1.0 12 4.2 + 3.0
Microsoft Visual Basic 4 1.9 9 3.1 + 1.2
Borland C++ ---- ---- 4 1.4 -----
Borland Turbo Pascal ---- ---- 1 0.0 -----
Missing / none 189 90.9 242 65.5 -25.4
______________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 23: Communications Packages, 1995
Large Small Totals
Communications dailies* dailies**
package ______________________________________________________________________
Procomm Plus 75 58.1% 26 27.4% 101 45.1%
Other 20 15.5 29 30.5 49 21.9
None 8 6.2 28 29.5 36 16.1
Crosstalk 12 9.3 2 2.1 14 6.3
Windows Terminal 7 5.4 7 7.4 14 6.3
SmartCom 7 5.4 3 3.2 10 4.5
______________________________________________________________
Totals 129 57.6% 95 42.4% 224 100.0
n = 287, missing observations = 63
* Circulation over 52,800. ** Circulation under 52,800.
TABLE 24: Communications Packages, 1994-95
Percentage
Communications 1994 1995 Change
package ___________________________________________________________________
Procomm Plus 64 30.8% 101 35.2% + 4.4%
Other 25 12.0 49 17.1 + 5.1
Crosstalk 11 5.3 14 4.9 - 0.4
Windows Terminal 3 1.4 14 4.9 + 3.5
SmartCom 11 5.3 10 3.5 - 1.8
Missing / none 90 43.3 99 34.5 - 8.8
____________________________________________________________
Totals 208 100.0% 287 100.0%
TABLE 25: First Choice for Additional CAR Tools, 1995
First choice for
a new CAR tool Frequency Percent
___________________________________________________________
New personal computers 22 7.7%
Upgrade existing PCs 17 5.9
MapInfo or Atlas GIS software 17 5.9
Internet access or improved access 15 5.2
CD-ROM drive reader 10 3.5
Any database package 8 2.8
New modem or upgrade 8 2.8
9-track tape drive 7 2.4
Network and server 7 2.4
FoxPro software, programming tools 6 2.1
CD-ROM writer/recordable 5 1.7
Visual Basic 5 1.7
Spreadsheet upgrade 5 1.7
Excel software, Excel training 4 1.4
Online service 4 1.4
Use resources better 4 1.4
More storage 4 1.4
Databases 3 1.0
New work station 2 0.7
Paradox software, programming tools 2 0.7
Upgrade portable PCs 2 0.7
Training 2 0.7
Optical disk 2 0.7
Access and training 2 0.7
Statistics package 2 0.7
More RAM 1 0.3
Data visualization software 1 0.3
SPSS 1 0.3
Text manager 1 0.3
Presentation graphics 1 0.3
Full-time CAR position 1 0.3
Scanner, software 1 0.3
Did not respond 115 40.1
____________________________________
Totals 287 100.0
REFERENCES
Anderson, I. E. (1994), Editor & Publisher international year book 1994, New
York: Editor & Publisher.
Anderson, I. E. (1995), Editor & Publisher international year book 1995, New
York: Editor & Publisher.
Brooks, B.S. & Yang, T. (1993, August). Patterns of computer use in newspaper
newsrooms: A national study of U.S. dailies. Unpublished paper presented to the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Kansas City, Mo.
Garrison, B. (1983, Spring). Impact of Computers on the Total Newspaper.
Newspaper Research Journal, 4(3), pp. 41-63.
Garrison, B. (1995). Computer-assisted reporting. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Garrison, B. (1996, in press). Successful strategies for computer-assisted
reporting. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hunt, D. (1995, May 14). Ticket to trouble: Wheels of injustice? Houston
Chronicle, 2 Star ed., pp. A-1, A-20.
Loeb, P. (1995, October 13). Computer-assisted reporting success stories,
unpublished presentation at the Society of Professional Journalists national
convention, St. Paul, Minn.
Meyer, P. (1979). Precision journalism, 2nd edition, Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana
University Press.
Norusis, M.J. (1995). SPSS for Windows base system user's guide, release 6.1.
Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
Overberg, P. (1995, September 19). Personal communication to author.
Reavy, M.M. (1996, March). How the media learned computer-assisted reporting,
unpublished paper presented to the Newspaper Division, AEJMC Southeast
Colloquium, Roanoke, Va.
-Page 30-
|
