VJO at Broadcast Video Expo 2011

By Umar Farooq

Last month, a few of us at Video Journalism Online (VJO) were fortunate enough to attend the Broadcast Video Expo 2011. The 3-day event at Earls Court 2 was home to production staff and broadcasters keen to market the future of the industry.

We felt the event had to hold an online element and we weren’t far wrong. Upon arrival, I was able to track down representatives from three different online video providers and conduct short video interviews. The key question was: how does your website help or promote video journalism in the online world? The analysis follows the video:

Maria Elena, ClipTV

Clip TV describes itself as an online viral video agency. The company deals with caught on camera reality footage from the comedy to dramatic rescue. In other words, the site encourages and promotes citizen journalism and clients can browse through a selection of the material online. Looking through the site, I came to the conclusion that the agency was like a ‘You’ve been framed’ video library. So, how does it help the video journalist? Well, although it doesn’t help them directly, Maria makes an interesting point when she says that the film-makers tracking reality footage have a great deal of variety to look through on Clip TV. However, whilst the market for viral video cannot be ignored, the lack of journalistic content on the website is a worry.

Cato Salter, Clip Canvas

At Clip Canvas, the attraction is high quality HD footage and graphics. In simple words, the website hosts an online catalogue allowing potential clients to look through a number of animations, backgrounds and landscapes. The site offers top quality stock footage for documentary and studio-programme makers. The catalogue itself is generic and some of the content can be used in journalistic video. There are, at the moment, 140,000 clips online so the diversity and variety cannot be questioned. The only small criticism which Cato himself alludes to in the interview is once again the lack of journalistic content on Clip Canvas. Despite this, providing high quality and HD video for clients means they’re on to a winner.

Emma Simpson, Journeyman Pictures

It was a pleasure to meet Emma from Journeyman, a film distributor specialising in “topical news features and documentaries.” The website is a video store, allowing you to either watch online or purchase on DVD. The YouTube channel has video clips from over 350 films and around 112,000 subscribers. The company itself was found in the 1990’s but the online elements are the most fascinating for our purposes. Content is journalistic, most specifically current affairs documentaries and there is a great variety once again. The ability to watch the documentaries online upon the payment of a subscription fee is a feature worthy of praise. It means Journeyman is a niche video-sharing website with a catalogue which can only be described as immense.

I will be back with more video journalism analysis, in the meantime don’t forget to take part in the “Online News Video Watchers Survey.” The results will be analysed very soon.

Thanks.

* The links in this post can be accessed and shared on the VJO delicious page.

You Chose the News- Skynews.com TV

By Phil Georgiadis

The blurring boundaries between TV news and online journalism- a new phenomenon which has only taken off in the past year or so? Maybe not.

Between 2007 and 2010 Sky News aired a half hour long evening programme called ‘SkyNews.com’, presented by the brilliant Martin Stanford, which brought the web’s agenda onto our TV’s for the first time.

As the channel proudly proclaimed, it was a groundbreaking programme, which ‘set out to change the shape of television news by integrating the web and TV’. Sky and Stanford realised that web content worked well on TV, and also that streaming TV content online offered access to a wider audience.

It won a prestigious Royal Television Society gong in 2008 for innovation, with the judges praising it because “it lets the public rather than the news editor set the agenda.”

Well before it was the accepted norm for channels to stream their content live online it simulcast on TV and on the Web, and even offered exclusive content for web viewers while the main TV channel was off on advert breaks.

The show would track topics which were ‘trending’ across the web, and offer a rundown of the day’s viral videos, taken from sites such as Youtube. It also took a serious journalistic interest in the internet, and how it was increasingly shaping the news agenda.

It created a ‘user-generated agenda’ well ahead of its time, and is missed.

Take a look at the clips below to get an idea of how the show worked:

Follow The Money

the FT

Financial newspapers are investing in online video journalism (Emily Craig)

By Emily Craig

It’s becoming more and more evident that the big broadcasters and their alter-egos, the solo vloggers, aren’t the only ones investing time and money in online video content. Many in the media have noticed that newspapers such as The Guardian and the New York Times have been building increasingly sophisticated multimedia platforms over the past few years. But there’s now a new player in the market as the financial dailies get involved in creating and sharing video content.

So why are financial newspapers in a category of their own? Why is their interest in online video journalism more surprising?

This question can, perversely, be answered with a question – would we expect video journalism to add anything to business reportage? For a medium that relies on creating a visual impact, how it is that footage of brokers and traders staring at computer screens in strip-lit offices has the potential to make an interesting or arresting piece of video journalism?

Admittedly, the likes of the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times do not confine themselves to only reporting financial news, but it’s certainly the main focus (and the most profitable part) of their output.

Now the websites of both newspapers are experimenting with the video format – and, apparently, making money out of it too. Perhaps crucially, each newspaper’s website is ring-fenced by a paywall. Their readers are paying for expert information, be it stock tips or expert analysis of the market.

And this means that their video journalism doesn’t have to be ground-breaking or particularly original – they have a captive audience, who come to their website for niche or ‘exclusive’ content, regardless of the form in which it is delivered.

But how exactly have these newspapers made a success out of the online video format? The Wall Street Journal now has 10 million streams per month of its latest videos, with more than 20 people working to produce up to 5 videos per day. Each video is bracketed by an advertisement, normally of about 15 seconds. The ‘shows’ normally come in at under 10 minutes, with some less than a minute in length, and all of them are filmed live.

We’re not talking cable television production values. Against a prosaic corporate-HQ-type backdrop, we hear live from correspondents in the newspaper’s other bureaus (another corporate-HQ-type backdrop…). Any newsworthy footage is usually provided by an agency like Associated Press or Reuters, with stills also used as wallpaper for a voicer from one of the newspaper’s journalists.

So far, not so inventive. But the style of the video ‘broadcasts’ has been compared to that of the cable TV bulletin in the US. With American networks continuing to produce programs that are more opinion-focused and less news-based, the Wall Street Journal could be onto something with its daily briefings at 8.30am and 4pm.

Video journalism online could also be a new source of commercial revenue. Advertisers are willing to pay more for a premium video slot once they’ve seen the impressive CPM (cost per thousand impressions) figures. It might even be that journalism is following the money, rather than the other way around – although that’s a difficult one to prove.

In contrast to the Wall Street Journal’s bulletin-style analysis, the Financial Times is not looking to reproduce an existing TV format. This arguably means it can afford to be a little more creative with its video output, since it’s looking to produce stand-alone ‘complimentary’ features.

However, for both newspapers at this stage, you’re left with the impression that filming a conference or interviewing a talking head is their idea of video journalism. Neither newspaper has been driven to experiment with video as a way of widening its audience or broadening its appeal.

There’s no critical need for either of these publications to be creative with presentation when they can afford to rely on the nature of their content to attract subscribers.

But, having been offered the chance to boost commercial revenue on the cheap, it’s hardly surprising that these newspapers are capable of identifying a shrewd investment. They’ve woken up to the trend, and it seems like they’re cashing in on it.