I can add a little to the conversation from a unique perspective. I was recruited from an IT help desk manager role into a broadcast engineering position earlier this year. The company I work for, a local news cable television station with 25-30 employees, has three full time engineers on staff but needed someone with an IT background to deploy an HD playout system, upgrade all aspects of the newsroom computer system, design and maintain a digital archive system, create a secure network, etc etc and so on.
I walked into a world patched together with string and tape by the existing broadcast engineering team in an attempt to keep the ship afloat. I think they made a smart gamble on someone with NO broadcasting experience.
I started in focusing on the IT related goals while picking up on the broadcast engineering side as I went along. It was painfully obvious from the beginning - broadcast engineering is simply evolving into a specialized realm of IT. Everything we do depends on our computers, servers and our network. The traditional broadcast engineers in our company were blindsided by this reality and have been scrambling to keep up.
In a nutshell - television broadcast engineering is not rocket science. I'd recommend advocating the hiring of someone with a strong IT background with a proven track record of mastering the unknown and a willingness to learn the technology and language of the industry.
In my situation I am the in-studio engineer in charge - my primary responsibility is the technical quality of our four news related cable channels - but the reality is that I am just a glorified IT guy. .I support everything that has electricity running through it (nothing new there). Sometimes I need to troubleshoot problems in the airpath, tackle issues with an audio board, switcher or mic - but more often than not I add value by solving computer related issues and discovering software solutions to problems that the existing engineering team would have simply missed.

In addition to lack of control unauthorized end user devices often put IT support in rule-bending, 'grey area' situations. End users grow accustom to using their own software and hardware - and when a 'mission critical' project or situation is jeopardized by that software or hardware failing the IT support staff could be ordered to get involved. In these hybrid environments a line does exist - but when faced with a situation where the company could lose money, face, etc., precedents of support are set. In my past years in a support desk with a 'company equipment and software only' policy I was called by executives to do everything from a home visit to install a printer to rewiring setting up and troubleshooting email on countless personal devices - each of which involves a bit of a learning curve and precious time and that time adds up quickly. I have not seen an IT director defend this line at all costs.