Fish Wrap Video

[Lenslinger]

As a TV news photographer who fancies himself something of a writer, I’m naturally infatuated with the newspaper industry. Too bad the feeling isn’t returned. Ever since the first local broadcaster rose up from the primordial ooze, newspaper folk have heaped endless derision on what they clearly view as a lesser journalistic species. ‘Shallow‘, ‘superficial’ and a few other ’S’ words are the usual slurs. Many times of course, we’ve more than earned those taunts. What with our penchant for hyperbole, our infatuation with talking hair-do‘s and our garish, swooping graphics - it’s no mystery why those in the print realm consider us so inferior. Of course, we in TV have our own opinions of our cross-town rivals, but I can honestly report the distaste isn’t nearly as fervid. Still, we rarely mix. Instead we resign ourselves to long-held prejudices and segregate ourselves into vastly different disciplines. Until now.

You see, newspapers are dying. With readership diminishing and new consumers flocking to on-line information sources, many in print are having to reconsider age old tactics. (To be fair, we TV geeks are also embroiled in upheaval. Participatory media and the twin tubes of the internets are rewriting the rules for everyone in the game - not just those goobs at the local paper.) At the recent ConvergeSouth conference, I sat in on a gathering of very educated print folk as they almost gnashed each other to pieces over the dire state of their medium. It was like watching a flock of piranha turn on each other for lack of suitable prey. At least that’s how it appeared to this TV simpleton and being such, I kept my own mouth shut. When I was called on, I suggested the crowd forgo the infighting and embrace - gasp! - video. Cue the crickets.

Of course, many newspaper websites have done just that, long before I feebly suggested my own brand of heresy. These days, a simple Google search will uncover countless newspaper sites doing new and exciting things with the moving image. But what exactly this new version of video news will look like is a subject of great debate. Long form analysis, hometown quirk, nat sound operas - you can do as many different things with a video camera as you can a ball point pen. Wisely, many in print are urging their fellow scribes to forge a new medium onto itself: a brand of video storytelling vastly different from the shrill thundering of the nightly newscast. But in rallying their masses, some newspaper people prove once and for all that we in TV hold no patent on myopic arrogance:

"It’s my personal bias of course, but I think newspaper journalists naturally produce better video stories than TV. Newspaper reporters begin with two advantages — no preconceived notions about time limits, and no preconceived notions about hyping up the story — they are more likely to let the story tell itself and edit it for interest, not time."

Bold words from an industry hemorrhaging market share. Honestly, I wish them all the luck in the world, for the amalgamation of our two mediums would greatly improve the information stream - and where better to showcase it than on-line? Trouble is, too many in the print realm dismiss local TV efforts as entirely without merit. They gleefully point to the lowest common denominators, the “Killer Dust-Bunnies Hiding Under Your Child’s Bed” series-piece syndrome. Granted, the worst of my lot is guilty of such tripe, but I for one don’t deal in this bottom-feeding and neither do those who share my logo. Print folk would do themselves a huge favor by putting aside their contempt and taking a long hard look at the very best of broadcast news, starting with the NPPA reels readily available on-line. Perhaps TV news isn’t the pristine verbiage currently rotting in my driveway, but neither is it graffiti. Come to grips with that and you just may have a future. Otherwise, I’ll see you at the revolution.

I’ll be the one eating your lunch.

[1911A1]

Originally Posted by Lenslinger

Trouble is, too many in the print realm dismiss local TV efforts as entirely without merit. They gleefully point to the lowest common denominators, the “Killer Dust-Bunnies Hiding Under Your Child’s Bed” series-piece syndrome.

"They criticize us for supposedly pandering while they run WINGO Games." --Blair Litton, Broadcast News

[Grip]

ah damn, I thought this was about fish

[theintern]

People have been forecasting that the key to success in this battle is convergence; to unite the newspaper and television reporters and blur ALL the lines (differences) of the two mediums.

I have worked for 2 stations, which have partnerships with a local paper. One station and the paper were both owned by the same company. In both cases, the word “partners” is almost always used as a way to credit the source, without saying… “We read in the newspaper”. There seems to be very little communication, and that causes both to lose out.

Why are people afraid of convergence? … When I was in school, it was pushed and pushed and pushed. It still failed. Sure, we ran the Daily News headlines on our nightly student newscast, but that was the extent of it. There was still competition, we beat them on stories, or they had something we didn’t know about. It wasn’t convergence at all. The newspaper staff at school seemed unwilling to cooperate, and because of that we weren’t going out of our way to make it work.

People in “the real world” have the same attitude, and I think it’s because they learned it. Newspapers are supposedly the sophisticated way of getting the news. Horse****! It’s bulky, out of date, and expensive (yes $0.50 is expensive.) Sophisticated people are going to look online for their news, and on stories that really matter; they will read (or watch) multiple sources (for free). When I get home and grab the paper, it is yesterday’s news. I won’t find out what happened today in the murder trial, until tomorrow. Right now, they can turn on their local news to find out, but it might be just as easy to sit down at the computer, or spend the last 30 min. of your workday checking out the news.

Since online news is fresh and easy to find, more people will start to go there. We maybe competing for web page hits, but regardless the 2 mediums will still exist. Online, there are print stories, video stories, and most of the time both. The people who want to read, will read and the people who want to watch will watch. People also know where to go to watch a video story (and it’s not the local newspaper website) …. They also know where to go to read the news…

I think that newspaper reporters need to learn from TV, there is a reason it is done this way. Also, TV reporters need to learn from newspaper… TV news websites usually hold crappy watered-down versions of the package that aired at 6, and what’s worse, they are written by the producer, or even a PA, instead of the reporter. News media online, and on-demand, is the future, and people will sort out which sites hold the “better video stories”. And the better print ones!