Fiedler also spent the 2007–’08 academic year as a fellow at Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center, studying the impact of new media on the ’08 presidential campaign and teaching a course. And he just happens to be the co-author of a yet-to-be-completed report, to be issued by the Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of Journalism Education, on, well, the future of journalism education. All of which has equipped him to argue — against the recent wishes of the journalism faculty — for teaching journalism not in a vacuum but along with disciplines that ink-stained wretches might find irrelevant or distasteful (e.g., public relations).
“First of all,” says Fiedler, “I think it’s both important and an asset for a student to be exposed to those other professional disciplines, particularly in an era where we’re learning that we must be able to communicate across a wide variety of platforms. It would be beneficial to someone in journalism, for example, to be exposed, to some degree, to the theory of mass communication, and perhaps of film, if you’re interested in being someone who utilizes video in communication.”
And subjects like PR and advertising? “Journalists should understand how persuasion works, for two reasons,” he adds. “First, it’s helpful to understand what constitutes argumentation, and what constitutes propaganda, so journalists are prepared to defend themselves against that. But second, if you want to be an editorial writer or a columnist or an advocate, it’s useful to understand how those tools can be used for your own benefit.”
Finally, Fiedler notes, there’s the awkward fact that journalism students tend — on balance — not to spend their careers as journalists. “One practical thing that a number of journalism scholars tend to overlook, or ignore,” he says, “is that the great majority of people who graduate from any university with a journalism degree eventually end up using it in a profession other than the news media.
“Maybe they go into public relations; maybe they work for an organization where they run internal communications, or end up as a spokesperson for a public official, or a spokesperson or advocate for a nonprofit or charity. . . . In an [isolated] school of journalism, students would obviously learn journalism skills. But they might not be exposed to some of the other disciplines that could be useful in a multimedia world.”
An unsteady rumble
The obvious caveat to Fiedler’s smooth arrival is that he’s still very much in his honeymoon period. He’s been at the job for fewer than three months, and has yet to preside over a full academic year. If, in the months and years ahead, he struggles to address COM’s most pressing needs — fundraising, better facilities, improved technical support, amiable relations between faculty and departments — today’s great expectations could make the ensuing disappointment all the more pronounced.
One other subplot worth watching: how will Fiedler’s preference for an academic rather than practical approach to journalism education be received? The tension between these two ideals — between a curriculum that encourages knowledge of other disciplines and treats journalism itself as an object of scholarly study, and one that puts a premium on the development of technical skills (lede writing, Web design, etc.) — isn’t new, exactly; witness Columbia University’s still-new Master of Arts in journalism, which puts a premium on subject-based knowledge. But the friction between the two camps remains acute.
