Well, at least that’s the interpretation of Lucas Grindley, Content Manager for the Herald Tribune, who wrote “but in today's story about the change, the Washington Post basically called convergence dead.”

He goes on to cite the paragraph from the Post:

“Newspaper companies fought hard for the rule change five years ago, but showed less interest in it this time because of changing market conditions in the television business. In the past, newspapers saw the high profits of television stations and envisioned significant cost-saving synergies between the properties. But that strategy was crippled by the rise of Internet video, which ate away at newspaper readers, television viewers, and the revenue of both mediums.”

The article reads “the strategy was crippled.” But does that really mean the Post thinks media convergence is “basically dead”?  Up to you.

In any case, Grindley uses this as a starting point to show that newspapers may in fact be even more interested in cross-media ownership with broadcast companies, not in spite, but because of online video.

The Herald Tribune already owns a TV station (it create a 24-hour cables news station to go around previous FCC rules), and both newsrooms have long been integrated. Staff from the TV channel posts video to the newspaper site. Advertising sales staff has been integrated to report to the same sales manager.

“I wouldn't underestimate the importance of convergence in taking advantage of that growth,” wrote Grindley. And a quick look at some of the media acquisitions of 2007 should confirm that.

Source: Lucas Grindley