And the Winner Ain't...

[Lenslinger]

For some time now forward-thinking newspapers have sought to include video in the ever important on-line presentations. Some of those encapsulated efforts have been downright groundbreaking, but much of it remains abysmal. Why shouldn't it? Advanced video skills aren't as easy to score as that discount handycam down at Best Buy. Just ask your local TV news photog - the one who's worked for years to master a craft most folk wisely take for granted. They'll tell you it takes time to hone the many disciplines required; from shot selection to microphone placement to the art of harboring found light. Grasp those fundamentals and the palette is yours. Eschew these principals and you'll find yourself scribbling on-screen.

All of which explains the mind-set of a group of television news shooters who recently sat down to judge a new category of NPPA Photojournalism contest: Web Video. Despite the many entries from newspapers far and wide, the judges decided not to name a first prize winner - blaming subpar work that failed to meet their criteria. Yes, they called the newspaper's video baby 'Ug-LEE'. One of the judges, KING-TV's Mark Morache, details why:

We saw some good journalism -- journalism with a big 'J.'But what caught me was that so many of these stories had an emotional disconnect. When you are watching a great story, you see it, you know it, you feel it in your gut. It sticks with you, and when it is over, you say, 'Re-rack it and play it again.'

The reasons they cited seem simple enough: jittery camerawork, poor lighting, endings that were way too oblique. It was all too much for an organization that's not above taking itself too seriously. (Full disclosure: I've been an intinerant critic of NPPA contests for years. Something about posturing for trinkets always left me feeling a little cheap.) Still, I applaud their latest stance - and not just because it hacks off the smuggest of the ink-stained set. No, I support their decision because it seeks to establish a standard of visual storytelling that transcends outlet, medium or format. Today's consumers want their news now, and their getting it on a staggering arrays of new gadgets. But whether they're nodding in front of their living room plasma or leaning over their laptop out by the pool, they don't want to struggle to understand anything - not in a 500 channel, infinite website world.

None of this of course, is what newspaper folk wanted to hear. Leery of merely reproducing what they see as a deeply flawed TV product, the Print Contingent know they're on the precipice of a new video age. By continuing to feed the ambitions of their more than able photography staffs, they'll no doubt forge new methods in visual storytelling. But before they can conquer new frontiers, they must come to grips with the basics. And a little humility wouldn't hurt. Having long held broadcasters in low regard, many inkslingers are now telling us they can do our medium better. To that I issue a hearty 'Up Yours'. Were I to saunter into your Editor's office, slam my midnight prose down on his desk and pronounce it far superior to anything in-house, you'd rightfully laugh me out of the room. Just ask Howard Owens, who simply cannot fathom how the current crop of newspaper video failed to measure up:

It’s hard to believe that all the entries in a national contest were so fatally flawed by basic shooting and editing mistakes that they weren’t worthy of honor. I suspect, more to the point, is that the judges were unwilling or unable to come to terms with the changing face of video news. The flaws were not necessarily in frames of the video, but in the eyes of the judges.

Not so, Howie. Most TV news photogs are rabid fans of all storytelling and are more than ready to be bowled over by something new and different. But like the audience we now share, our standards are too well-placed to endure shoddy work for very long. With fewer time restrictions and a ubiquitous delivery method, the newspaper industry can indeed rewrite the book on video news. No one's demanding your fare be as slick (and vapid) as what we churn out on the evening news, but it must be clear, clean and easy to follow. Otherwise, no number of grand proclamations about new frontiers will make up for garbled audio, distracting backlight and meandering narration. Just ask your news consumer, the one nodding off at the family computer.

[Baltimore Shooter]

Well said!!

Warren

[Sportsguy]

Indeed Stewart, indeed.

[photogguy]

I read that in your blog this morning, and my first thought was to send a link of your post to Howard Owens, just so he can (maybe) understand the thinking behind why there were no first place winners in the catagory, and realize it isn't just photogs who, in his words "unwilling or unable to come to terms with the changing face of video news."

[Chicago Dog]

Originally Posted by Howard Owens

It’s hard to believe that all the entries in a national contest were so fatally flawed by basic shooting and editing mistakes that they weren’t worthy of honor. I suspect, more to the point, is that the judges were unwilling or unable to come to terms with the changing face of video news. The flaws were not necessarily in frames of the video, but in the eyes of the judges.

Aah, suck it up, Owens. I've seen the exact same thing happen to TV news photogs.

Back in the days of my first market, regional NPPA judges decided to withhold awards for first place in two categories during one quarterly contest. I don't remember what categories they were.

I do remember feeling two things: shock and reassurance. Shock, obviously, because I didn't know the judges could do that. It seemed strange to me that not even "the lesser of all evils" would get an award.

Reassurance because, "Why should the 'lesser of all evils' be rewarded for crappy work? If it sucks, it sucks!" It felt good knowing the judges weren't willing to lower the bar simply to give first place to someone. When I actually placed in a category, the achievement was that much sweeter.

These complainers are going through what every new shooter entering pieces into NPPA contests goes through: paying your dues. From this point, they'll take one of two roads that every new shooter takes after receiving that sheet of scathing critiques: learn from it and improve, or forever detest the NPPA for being "so unfairly judgemental."

Judgemental? For excellence in a visual medium? Duh.

[OmegaRed]

I always thought awards were for something that goes above and beyond the daily norm. Right now, we don't even know what the online norm is, so how can we give an award for something that's beyond it?

[eb]

Well said, Lenslinger.

There is content, and there is craft. Both are important.
The content of any particular story - whether shot by an online journalist with a small camera, or by us with big cameras - might be great, but most of the time (as we all know) the content is not strong enough to carry poor shooting and editing. That is the area (craft) where many of the new online videojournalists are just starting to learn. Sure, anyone can pick up a camera, stick a mic in someones face, roll tape, and publish to the internet. If the content is outstanding, it works. But if its average content, then the shooting and editing style matters even more. That is where, hopefully, the NPPA can help. The mission of the NPPA is to "advance" photojournalism in all its forms. Education is part of that mission. The contests are to recognize quality - and promote the advancement of better video journalism. (Both content and craft.)

Since many newspapers have newly discovered video journalism, I think many are still developing the craft. You will see quality improve more and more over the next few years....as those folks learn, improve, etc... And the competition for viewers will increase.

It is good that this discussion is happening - within the NPPA television realm/contest. We have been telling visual stories for decades, and understand what works and what doesn't. The NPPA is a good central clearing house to see what others are doing, and learn.

[micaelb]

I know the NPPA wants to be out front in setting standards for video on the web and , at the same time, breaking down the barriers between the people who shoot video for the web and us TV people.

I was happy to see some places not awarded in the web categories and, if you noticed, they didn't award anything , no first, no second, no third, no honorable mention, in Sports Photography. I didn't see the stories but I applaud the fact that they are keeping the standards high.

"In the Sports Photography category the judges did not award any winners for first, second, third place or honorable mentions. Contest co-chair Merry Murray explained: “There were only four entries in this category this year after dividing it into two categories, Sports and Sports Feature. The judges disqualified one entry, feeling it was a Sports Feature. They chose not to award any winners in this category with only three to choose from.”...from nppa.org

[Chicago Dog]

Originally Posted by Howard Owens

Go read: Innovator’s Dilemma. Then maybe you’ll get it. Until then, we aren’t even talking the same language. After Lenslinger reads it, then maybe he’ll be somebody I can pay attention to on things like online video.

Either that, or he's just miffed that The 'Slinger's a better writer than he is.

Originally Posted by Howard Owens

There’s no doubt there’s a lot of crap newspaper video out there, but there is also a ton of stuff, that as a matter of being online video, is way better than 98 percent of the stuff being produced for online by TV people. Go read my post with comments from Chris Jennewein about TV news … very much correct. TV news lost its way about the same time cameramen lost hand cranks on their cameras.

... Wow.

This guy's pretty defensive. How is that even possible? He knows what happened, but he obviously doesn't understand why it happened.

[pre-set]

Does this actually surprise anyone? Really?

[Buck]

A Minneapolis station (KARE) won station of the year?? NO WAY! Was Denver asleep this year????

[Frank McBride]

Without consulting the official record, my guess is that after KUSA, KARE has the most station of the year awards. When they get it, they earn it.

FMc