newspaper reporters are now video editors

busterkeaton wrote on 5/6/2007, 9:39 PM
I went to an event tonight where I was with a lot of food writers and editors. At my table were folks from big papers in Chicago, Arizona and Connecticut. All of them said the same thing was happening at their papers. Both due to the web
1. Budgets were being cut and staffing was down
2. Newspapers are getting into the multimedia business bigtime.

The writers were being asked to take photos and shoot video. So if you are doing a story on a restuarant, the writers will be the ones collecting all the media on it. They are not sending out a separate photographer or videographer.

None of them were happy about it. As they said we are word people and we think in words and not pictures. So they are having to go to digital photography classes and classes in "Something Cut Pro or whatever" as one of them put it.

So one the one hand, it's another story about how companies are trying to do video without paying a video pro. On the other, it may be an opportunity for someone getting started in video to approach their local newspaper and offer the solution of being an in house multimedia expert. It might be an opportunity for Sony Digital Software to approach print news media and offer themselves as the easiest and best solution to get nonvideo folk up and running. It might be an opportunity for a video pro to approach their local paper and offer themselves as a trainer or a consultant.

Comments

PeterWright wrote on 5/6/2007, 11:55 PM
Interesting topic Buster, and some great ideas re potential.

The notion of Online newspapers replacing or gaining in importance over Print is inevitible I guess - the technology is already around.
Read an article and/or click pic to watch video. On the inside Food page, read and print recipe and click pic to see dish being prepared and cooked. etc
Grazie wrote on 5/7/2007, 12:08 AM
.. or Pete, how about an auto updating news-sheet.

You unroll it in your favourite cafe, park bench, tube train or whatever; thumbprint the edge - this gives the necessary info for your access and 80p subscription and you can read away!

I like this - I like this very much indeed!

Oh and you can have adverts that are targeted to that part of town/city you are in.. Oh and it could, of course be an all singing and dancing piece of folding "stuff".

The point I'm making is that the size of cell-mob phones just aint and will never get the "spread" of a broad/narrow sheet newspaper.

Give me my Guardian/Times/Independent in my favourite London Cafe and I'm a happy boy. Get me something that is infinitely update-able?!?!?? Woah!

. .and yes, if I see an article I want to re-read, it could be patched thru to my home PC, to my friend or bulletined to friends or whatever.


.. anyways just some more Grazie ideas . .. it'll never happen .. .
ken c wrote on 5/7/2007, 3:32 AM
it's a great opportunity for one of you to jv with a field reporter and create a very profitable "how to shoot video: the reporter's guide" DVD.


ken
farss wrote on 5/7/2007, 4:48 AM
I'm with Grazie on this one. Does anyone watch those dinky videos on newspaper's web sites? Is this trend driven by consummer demand or is it just a case of "well they've got this so we'd better have one too"?

A story of technology gone mad:
Radio survives because you can listen to the radio while you do something else, like drive a car. I'm told drive time is what keeps radio going mostly.
And yet there's serious proposals to switch all radio broadcasting to digital. The rationale is that digital radio is much better because it can have pictures.

Bob.
Adontech wrote on 5/7/2007, 6:09 AM
I've been working at a newspaper for the last 10 years. Within the last year, every newspaper in our corporation has purchased at least 2 HD cameras, lighting equipment and Avid. And you are right, we haven't hired anyone new to fill the video position(s). We have reorganized. A team of trainers travelled to each paper to train reporters and photographers on how to properly capture, edit and post video. There are a few reporters who are interested in video that will take the cameras out, but we have one person who has always been the technical person in the newsroom who is primarily responsible for shooting and editing video. And, yes, video on the web creates a lot of traffic which bumps our numbers up, which sells more advertising......
alltheseworlds wrote on 5/7/2007, 6:22 AM
I've done a lot of work with newspaper web video. A few observations:

- Newspaper websites tend to be followers, not innovators. They did not want to go online since its a very poor revenue generator (news for free), but it's become a case of "move your brand online to ensure you survive the next 20 years".

- News web video gets extremely poor hits compared with text and is not cost effective by a long, long way. But it's perceived as desirable to advertisers and is being pursued as a potentially big revenue source in the medium term.

- Many news websites are being run by ex-print staff with little understanding or often little desire to be in that role. At the same time they do not often have a lot of money to splash around since their division of the brand is not yet 'paying its way'.

- The "video experts" they tend to hear from are all TV staff (often from affiliated news organizations) who constantly blather about needing high-end gear, editing suites and full expert 'crews'. This both unnerves and intimidates the print staff (especially management who tend to know the least about the technology, but know all about cost and performance).

There are very few people in the "between zone" who can deliver low-cost web-based video solutions to mostly untrained print staff. Even if they do present, they are often dismissed by the TV "experts" whose mantra is that low-cost solutions = amateur results. Since the print staff know so little about this field they are often easily convinced that cheap = crap, expensive = good, very expensive = very good.

I was in a newspaper office a couple of weeks ago where two female reporters were almost in tears as they'd been given a hard case of HD video gear and a new computer with Avid and expected to start doing mutlimedia reports. I was paid as a consultant for two days ostensibly to show them Avid. Instead I showed them how to shoot the camera in SD and downloaded a trial copy of Vegas and they had their first clip out two days later.

These guys are running tiny video clips so what are they doing shooting in HD ? You guessed it, the affiliated TV station told them that was the best gear, so that's what they bought. No matter that the clips run as 320 x 240 !

The reporters were very relieved, but I told them that what they were using was not Avid ( they honestly had no idea), and that they had a month to convince their editor to buy a copy of Vegas. Hopefully by the time a month's up the results will make that a no-brainer.

Funny days....
richard-courtney wrote on 5/7/2007, 7:18 AM
With the cost of paper both in money and landfill......
a wise decision.

What ever happened to the "wireless newspaper"?
(a PDA like device that gets the morning newpaper download)
deusx wrote on 5/7/2007, 7:27 AM
One of the most annoying aspects of CNN. com is videos.

They have a bunch of stories offered in video form, only.

It is ridiculous, as am sure a lot of people ( like me ) just would want to read through it, and not wait for an add and then video, which ads nothing to the story anyway ( maybe 1% of these stories have something where seeing it actually ads to it ).

Paul Fierlinger wrote on 5/7/2007, 7:35 AM
The New York Times editorial page has an interesting article on this subject:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/opinion/06pubed.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fThe%20Public%20Editor
TheHappyFriar wrote on 5/7/2007, 9:14 AM
What ever happened to the "wireless newspaper"?

that's sitting on my desk, downloading the news from Reuters. :)

i, for one, can't really stand news videos unless it's something that must be seen. i just don't get the point.
Cliff Etzel wrote on 5/7/2007, 10:43 AM
I am now working as one of the indie VJ's developing my reel currently. I worked in Newspaper and magazine and this is the future of news IMO. Stripped down to a one man production team so to speak. Vegas seems to fit in quite well for this as it really shines for field editing on a laptop.

Try out these links regarding the upswell in Indie Video Journalism:

Viewmagazine.tv

Michael Rosemblum's Blog - I happen to be quoted on todays posting :-O

Rosemblum Institute

Jeff Jarvis

My Blog
alltheseworlds wrote on 5/7/2007, 3:47 PM
Adding a few obvious video news gathering features in Vegas (like super-simple intro title element and lower-third), and pitching it directly at news organizations would be a good marketing pitch imho.
Cliff Etzel wrote on 5/7/2007, 4:31 PM
Good point - it would also run on less than optimal laptops - hence saving on the budgets of smaller publications.

Cameras like the Canon HV20 are just begging to be put in the hands of VJ's - I read today that Canon is specifically targeting that market segment. Combine that with the XDCAM EX for more serious acquisition, and the GOB's of network news are seeing the extinction of content distribution as they know it.

The great thing is, for vodcasting news, etc, any SD camera will do - I still don't feel compelled just yet to move to HD except for the XDCAM EX, but I may have to look at the A1U later this year as it meets the requirements I have for small, lightweight and high quality image acquisition - and the sticker shock won't be nearly as bad..
p@mast3rs wrote on 5/7/2007, 5:36 PM
As a high school teacher, this actually concerns me deeply. It isnt bad enough that today's youth suffers from horrendous reading skills even though they have the best technology available. But it scares me to think that we have moved more to a visual based society rather than one that allows the user to visualize through their own mind with reading comprehension. Far too much is left out when something is just visual. Compare a book to a movie made about that book. The experience is completely different.

This does nothing but further the immediate media consumption society that we have evolved into and we wonder why test scores are so low in our high schools.
Cliff Etzel wrote on 5/7/2007, 5:47 PM
I don't follow you - on the one hand, you are here to discuss what is essentially a visual medium, and then you state it scares you because it is a visual medium. There are those who need instruction and words to learn, and then there are those who are kinesthetic like myself - Let me get my hands on it and work with it. Neither one is wrong.

If test scores are low in high school, then neither the parents nor the teachers are doing their jobs from what I can see. Both my grown kids (in their early 20's) graduated with very high marks in school and both are visual people.

It's the parent responsibility to make sure their children learn in school - the teacher is the facilitator. If the test scores are low - sounds more like not enough involvement in their lives.

Immediate consumption of information is the responsibility of the consumer - what they consume, when and in what quantity. If young adults aren't taught self discipline - it's not the medias fault.
p@mast3rs wrote on 5/7/2007, 6:42 PM
I heavily disagree with you. Teachers can only do so much in the classroom. As a society, we are beginning to rely more on visual media more so than we are print. That is the major reason reading scores are very low. Its not because the teachers dont work with the students. Its that media itself has become such an abundance that it is much easier for students to view a news piece than it is for them to read about and think and comprehend the words that compose it.

You would be shocked at the reading and writing levels of today's youth. These are the same people that will govern your country and make decisions that will affect your life one day. I understand you dont fear it because you dont see it daily. I have plenty of kids that given the option between reading a print story or viewing a 5 minute video they will select the video every time....not because they are visual people but because the ability to be lazy is there. It takes "too much" effort to read and think logically. Media makes it easier to be lazy. That was the concern I was voicing.

I have no problem with media being abundant but I am afraid with moves like these, the foundations of learning and true art forms will begin to fade. No longer will reading be an attempt to grow one's mind but rather the only choice because there was no video available for the story.
ReneH wrote on 5/7/2007, 6:50 PM
Newspapers subscriptions are down, so it comes as no surprise. Maybe if they didn't go along with publishing too much propaganda they wouldn't be in this predicament there in now. People would find good reasons to buy papers.
alltheseworlds wrote on 5/7/2007, 9:33 PM
I don't think the problem is content. The same content online gets massive hits and quality-wise is still far ahead of blog-style "opinion news" which usually just feeds off mainstream sites anyway.

The problem is that newspapers are one of the few businesses (along with music) where your entire product can be 'consumed' on the internet.

Unlike, cars, food, hardware etc, a good newspaper website IS your product, not just an extended ad for its real-world solid-object equivalent.

Unfortunately for newspapers the precedent of "free news online" was set long ago and it's way too late to backtrack.
busterkeaton wrote on 5/13/2007, 3:28 AM
Or that's what I thought after seeing an interview on the NY Times website. It's the NY Times Iraq reporter discussing the Battle for Baghdad. It's professionly lit, shot with two cameras, and has use of shadows and back lights. Only at the end of the clip did a see the title that the interview was done by the Canada Broadcast Company for a documentary they are doing.

but I was still surprised by the amount of video on the Times website. They have their film critics, reviewing movies and showing clips, they have a profile of a high end sausage maker by the Style section.

They have this clip about bike polo


which is a amusing look at a sport you can play when you have a lot of bike messengers together.

Or this one which is a interview with the guy who wrote put his song Code Monkey and let other folks use it for non commercial use. Since then he watched it become a giant youTube favorite with other people making videos for it and it even has its own dance. Here's the best for it.
Coursedesign wrote on 5/13/2007, 10:03 AM
Buster,

Thank you for posting this video! I don't know how many can appreciate what an astonishing philosophical masterpiece this is, and how much depth it has.

I'm not ashamed to say I got tears in my eyes from watching this.

I had quite a few employees like this "Code Monkey," and I really cared about them. They were like family to me.

kkolbo wrote on 5/13/2007, 12:07 PM
I want to approach this from a personal experience side. My local paper, which a part of the Tribune company, is going this way now. They are adding video to the web. They have been doing video for a while and have had the ability to feed broadcast live interviews from the news desk for a long time. They played with doing short news casts for the web, but as someone here said, that is not the most popular feature.

I have been professing that print organizations HAVE to get into multimedia delivery to survive. I still believe that to be true. The answer is NOT doing TV news. You must use the video in the way that is most desired by your audience.

The paper here is finding that formula and I am proud of them. They are handing video cameras (consumer camcorders) to their reporters. The reporters are expected to shoot with them. The paper is looking to add B-Roll to their stories and they want to add interview snippets. In other words, not replace the written article, but enhance it with additional information, like the recorded interview, the way you use a picture to enhance a printed story. As an enhancement, I believe they have a successful formula.

They are working to train their reporters on how to do this task within the natural process of what they normally do. They are not trying to make polished videos like an ESPN video, but they want to teach them to add elements that will place the reader there with them. For example, instead of using a small cassette recorder while you interview a person (a common practice) why not point a palm camcorder at them to record it for reference? If you get a couple of small useful clips from it, you get a great enhancement to the written story.

I am involved with this. This summer I will be teaching the print students in the High School Sports Reporting Institute that the paper runs to do this task. It is very different than what I will be teaching the three TV Students who will be learning full on event and sports coverage during the Institute. Along the way I expect to help the paper's staff with their transition. They key is finding the correct tools and the correct purpose of the media in the on-line print world.

While there are many that will disagree, I believe that any print journalist who does not learn some basics of multi-media journalism, or a still photographer who can not do a video photo montage, is like the TV pro who refuses to learn the basics of digital video production or HD. They will continue to survive in pockets, but they are missing out on many opportunities that could help them weather the changing environment.