desktop publishing: what a difference a year makes (166184058)

7/29/2019 Desktop Publishing: What a Difference a Year Makes (166184058)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/desktop-publishing-what-a-difference-a-year-makes-166184058 1/4

Desktop Publishing: What a Difference a Year Makes

Copyright 1990 CAUSE From _CAUSE/EFFECT_ Volume 13, Number 1, Spring1990. Permission to copy or disseminate all or part of this material isgranted provided that the copies are not made or distributed forcommercial advantage, the CAUSE copyright and its dateappear, and noticeis given that copying is by permission of CAUSE, the association formanaging and using information resources in higher education. Todisseminate otherwise, or to republish, requires written permission. Forfurther information, contact CAUSE, 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 302E,Boulder, CO 80301, 303-449-4430, e-mail [email protected]

DESKTOP PUBLISHING: WHAT A DIFFERENCE A YEAR MAKESby James S. Netherton

************************************************************************

James S. Netherton is Vice President for Administrative Affairs atBaylor University, responsible for computing, athletics, institutionalresearch, general counsel, governmental relations, and all business andfinancial areas. Formerly Vice President for Information Systems, he isalso a tenured professor of mathematics and computer science.

************************************************************************

ABSTRACT: At a current issues session at CAUSE88, the topic of desktoppublishing released a flood of frustration and complaint. A year laterat CAUSE89, a different picture emerged from a follow-up session on DTP.This article is based on experiences shared in those sessions.

In the glory days of the Roman Empire progress abounded. One of thegreat modern advancements was running water. Brought to major citiesthrough aqueducts that remain engineering marvels, water was distributedto households through pipes made of lead. The tragic eruption of Mt.

Vesuvius preserved for us a view of life at that time. Visitors toPompeii today are struck by the then-unrecognized but devastatingeffects of lead poisoning on those ancient beneficiaries of progress.

Although the consequences are not life threatening, desktoppublishing (DTP), like the lead pipe, has produced a number ofunintended negative side-effects. As was the case with many othersoftware advances, it was produced for the professional but marketed tothe novice. But with DTP, the market expansion has often created moreproblems than it has solved.

First, a brief acknowledgement of the benefits. In the hands of aprofessional, desktop publishing is marvelous. Utilizing good hardware

and a quality DTP package, a properly trained, skilled publicationsprofessional in a few days can produce camera-ready copy more carefullyrevised than is normally achieved after trading drafts many times with atypesetting/graphics firm, and at substantially lower cost. Betterquality, in less time, and at a lower cost -- those oft-promised butseldom delivered goals of computerization -- are truly available throughDTP, but at a price. That price is the service of a properly trained,skilled publications professional.

Editing is an art, a science, a profession. Those who master its



intricacies are professionals in the finest sense of that word and theroad to mastery is long and arduous. An editor is a craftsman refiningan author's style and pace. Articles that flow communicate far more thanthose that must be waded through. Layout design and the judicious use ofwhite space require a different kind of skill, little understood orappreciated by the uninitiated. With the current flood of publications,whether a page attracts or repels the eye often determines whether ornot an article is read. Adequate keyboard skills, competence with a wordprocessing program, and a B on a high school term paper do not make onea publications professional. At least not until DTP.

On many campuses today, much of DTP is done by novices -- unskilled,poorly trained, and not always willing -- and seldom is it part of aplanned, coordinated, effective campus-wide publishing program. In fact,if a campus aspires to a planned, effective publishing program, manyuses of DTP can undermine such a program and disrupt other campusservices as well.

Harsh criticism. How can this be?

To understand the forces driving DTP one must examine thechallenges facing higher education: rising costs, decreased revenues,declining student populations, snowballing criticism begun by formerSecretary of Education Bennett, the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the

Alternative Minimum Tax, decreased governmental support, increasedgovernmental control. These pressures, while not entirely new, are moreintense than ever before. They have turned many university presidentsinto beggars, and deans and academic department heads intoentrepreneurs.

Development, student recruitment, and public relations have becomeeducation's most vital activities. Academic leaders at every level feelthe need to place these activities at the top of their personal agendas.In each of these endeavors effective communication is one key tosuccess. Departmental newsletters, promotional brochures, and massmailings are, and have always been, visible responses to pressingproblems.

Checks and balances counteract pressures. For decades the cost andmechanics of printing provided universities a means of centralizedcontrol. Budget oversight and operation of the campus printing plantallowed the administration to decide what publishing would be done andby whom. DTP has eliminated those controls and the stampede is underway.

What are the problems created by DTP?Some are obvious, others more subtle. First, material produced withdesktop publishing programs has the potential to be mediocre to poor --if not downright disagreeable. The story of the use of seventeen fontsin one departmental newsletter has been repeated so often it has become

legend. Resolution of 1270 dpi will not make a silk purse out of a sow'sear. The earlier discussion of editing and graphic art capabilitiesexplains why.

The departmental "publishing expert" is often the secretary, butusing DTP software requires a level of sophistication and skill whichexceeds secretarial job descriptions. Those who master such skills oftenrequest reclassification as an editorial assistant with appropriate payincreases. Those who do not master these skills become a continuingburden to the user services department. In either case, department heads



are often forced to request position upgrades followed by a newsecretarial position since someone must now assume the work thesecretary used to do.

To expect any one person to provide all printing skills, no matterhow proficient with a DTP package, is perhaps unreasonable. In aprinting plant word processing, proofreading, editing, text layout, andprinting are done by a team of specialized professionals.

Many campus printing operations that formerly operated at a surplusnow operate at a deficit. The high volume, easy printing that helped payoverhead and level out workload is now being done in departments. Theprinting industry is changing swiftly and university print shops areslow in responding. In fact, rapid technological changes pose a majorthreat to many employees in campus printing operations.

Standardization poses yet another challenge. The differentcombinations of hardware and software provide a wide variety of DTPsolutions. Lack of standardization inevitably exacts a high price, andthe problems of selecting, enforcing, and supporting campus standards inthe area of information technology are well known.

The critical areas of development, student recruitment, and publicrelations have made the corporate image vitally important. Institutions

trying to forge a better future have paid consulting firms substantialsums to design a new logo and publications program, only to see theeffects undermined by the uncoordinated publications plethora producedby DTP. One well-intentioned computer center produced a superbpostscript rendering of the new logo and made it available over thecampus network. The president had apoplexy.

In a fairly short span of time one family affiliated with a privateinstitution received mailings from the business school (Dad's degree),the English department and the law school (Mom's degrees), theengineering school (daughter's major), the alumni association, theadmissions office (recruiting the son), and the public relations anddevelopment office (gift solicitation), all with different and sometimes

conflicting messages and requests. From the family's perspective, theuniversity was poorly managed and wasteful.

Who is responsible, and for what?

So DTP causes problems. Should that be of concern to the computingcenter? If the problems are severe enough, blame may need to beassessed, and the computing organization is a likely choice. Most peopleconfronted with problems look for help and, again, the center is anobvious source.

Responses of the computing organization vary considerably fromcampus to campus. Some wash their hands of the matter: DTP is not

administrative computing, nor instruction, nor research. It does not fittraditional services and there are not enough staff to do the currentjobs. Other organizations designate campus standards for equipment andsoftware, and provide training and help lines. Classes on beginning andadvanced page layout packages are added to courses on word processing,spreadsheets, and data bases. Occasional classes even include editingfundamentals taught not by computing staff but publicationsprofessionals.

Computer center support of DTP continues to evolve. On one campus



training classes formerly taught by computing professionals with aneditorial guest lecturer now have reversed those roles -- editorialprofessionals teach the class with occasional help from the computerspecialist. On another, samples of campus newsletters are beingcollected and confidential critiques produced. Some center staffs haveattempted to define and support a wide range of services which aid DTP:high resolution printing, lists and labels for almost every universityconstituency, and free editorial assistance. And some computing staffshave even become proactive in problem resolution, defining the problemswhich exist, identifying the issues which need to be addressedaddressed, and sharing these insights with the campus managementstructure.

Campuses are establishing a variety of structures to monitor,coordinate, improve, and even control the new distributed publishingefforts. Many have created and disseminated campus-wide styleguidelines, especially with respect to use of representative typefacesand the institution's seal and/or logo(s).

What is the future of DTP? It will not go away nor should it. It hasdone much good, and in the future will do far more. For now there aremany, many problems to solve which involve time, hard work, additionalresources, frustration, compromise, trial and error, and occasionalsuccess. But then, which of our activities over the past several decades

have been much different?

From a discussion of DTP at CAUSE88 to a repeat session at CAUSE89,DTP-related problems identified were much the same, but attitudes towardthem were dramatically different. There remains some bad publishing, butimprovement is evident and there is confidence it will continue. As forlack of controls and coordination, campuses have coped in the past withthe problems of distributed decision making and they are coping withthis one as well, each in ways appropriate to their institutionalcharacter.

New problems are disturbing; old problems merely annoying. Webemoan or perhaps just enjoy sharing new problems; we are quietly

confident we can handle old problems. In the past year the problems ofDTP have grown old.

************************************************************************

desktop publishing: what a difference a year makes (166184058)

Documents