The Dumbest VJ Promo I've Read Yet...

[NYC Street]

OK: disclosure first. I think the guy who thinks he understands Next Generation TV well enough to write a column on TVSpy about it happens to be one of the world's biggest dopes, with the understanding of a lightweight PA and a loud megaphone, nothing more. And I thought it long before he hit his knees for this week's VJ BJ. But when I read this particular bit, I couldn't believe my eyes:

Video journalism is an opportunity to create even more video content with more perspectives. The flexibility of the concept enables journalists to tell stories as they happen, rather than producing a package to be aired hours later after an event occurred.

Increasingly, local broadcasters will have to produce video content for multiple platforms: broadcast, web, cell phones, and video on demand. Once again, the VJ model is much better suited to distributing unique content to multiple platforms. "KRON is still wrapped in the show thing at this point, but this new path they are on lends itself to a nonlinear perspective. We are essentially producing video files. All these pieces are on a server. We are one step away from people at home accessing these video files," explains Rosenblum.

The existing broadcast model is limited to "repurposing" the same content across multiple distribution channels. Study after study has shown that growth for new distribution channels like the web or cell phones requires unique content, not content originally produced to meet the sensibilities of broadcasting. "You can't give the audience corn every day. You've got to give them a well-balanced diet," says Antonitis.

Uh, hello...is anybody alive in there? The only way to produce VJ/one man band material, the ONLY way, is to air it hours after it happens, after being shot, written and edited by one person. The way to go live with a story is...wait for it...to GO LIVE, not play with tech toys.

And, as should be plainly evident, one man bands eliminate, rather than creating, perspectives: there's only ONE on each story...not two, three, four or more.

As to the multiple platform issue, it's another non-starter. Any content can be digitized on a real time basis and output in streaming or downloadable media. Any story can be expanded, as several stations in New York are already doing (WNBC's use of this technique has been particularly strong, and WCBS Radio is doing it nicely, too).

The "wrapped in the show thing" reference is about the only interesting thing in the article. While it's true that some portion of the audience prefers to go directly to the stories they know exist, and we do have to serve that audience to, the model MR seems to be pumping here is one in which no story exists for which there is no video...which would be yet another disservice to viewers.

"In Defense of VJs" reads like a typical PR piece of the type our pal Mikey regularly gets weak magazine writers to put out. It's a defense from all the straw men, and none of the real issues that make the one man band model a loser for stations and audiences worldwide.

 

[Chicago Dog]

My favorite part is how the writer of that article also has absolutely no local newsroom experience.

Blind leading the blind.

 

[Dink]

Who do you suppose is running the companies that own television stations? It's people who ALSO haven't ever worked in newsrooms. To those people, the management school graduates who don't have the slightest idea how news is actually gathered, that bullsh*t sales pitch sounds really good.

That's how Rosenblum keeps getting clients. He sells the idea to people who have control of the money, but who have no idea how news works. To them, he says the right buzz words and sounds like a genius. He'll continue to get clients that way until he creates a failure spectacular enough to show the MBA types that it doesn't work. Then his sales will drop off, but not before he makes millions more.

 

[white balance]

All good points, and I was thinking the same thing when I was reading the article too NYC.

For the first time ever I read an article that presented both sides of the VJ argument. It was in the November edition of NPPA's News Photographer Magazine.

Karin Schwanbeck did an excellent job of shedding light on both the pros and cons of the concept. She even interviewed a former employee who quit after taking the VJ training mainly because he felt he was no longer competative in the situation he was put in.

Imagine that - actually interviewing somebody who had to go out and VJ as opposed to a guy in a suit who's never been out in the field at all.

For the record - the photog who quit was a damn good VJ and also one of the most talented photogs on staff. He's won several NPPA and Emmy Awards. Now he's at a competing station.

The funny thing is, we've already distanced ourselves from the concept. We have 4 two man crews covering the news of the day, while the VJ's fill in the blanks. Some turn stories every other day - some do day turns.

I'm not unhappy with the system we're currently using. I do however think the only reason we put it in place was to save some cash. Now instead of spending $35K on high quaility cameras, we're spending $5k on something that puts out horrible pictures and makes us look like tourists.

Oh well, as long as Aunt Deb can get her $392,000 bonus on top of her $624,000 annual salary. That's really what's at stake here isn't it? I mean, who cares if Young Stock is now selling at $1.82. Aunt Deb has to fly her kids to Atlanta for front row seats to U2.

Yeh, I AM BITTER.

 

[Natural Born Stringer]

Originally posted by NYC Street:
Uh, hello...is anybody alive in there? The only way to produce VJ/one man band material, the ONLY way, is to air it hours after it happens, after being shot, written and edited by one person. The way to go live with a story is...wait for it...to GO LIVE, not play with tech toys.........{brevity snip}

We interrupt this program to bring you another NBS Special Report.

I think I've got you figured out Street. You like to hear yourself talk. It validates you. Why else would you be consistently preaching to the choir? It's so easy to speak your mind when everyone around you will agree with you, isn't it? Then those who don't agree can simply be dismissed with "well, he's obviously nuts because he doesn't agree with the rest of US".

Something else I've figured out about you: For someone so interested in just the facts, you've missed a pretty big one - VJ isn't strictly OMB. If all hell breaks loose you can send more than one VJ to cover it you know. That's what makes this model unique. It can adapt to any news scenario you can throw at it. Anything. From a visiting VIP to a terrorist attack to a natural disaster to an alien invasion, you've simply got more resources to send into the field than a traditional shop. How you deploy those resources is up to you.

As for "well how would they go live?" google COFDM for technology that is already making line of sight microwave transceivers obsolete. And guess what - it's CHEAPER than traditional ENG gear and can fit in a standard issue small SUV.

See? These exist today. This is not "someday we'll have flying cars" tech toy speculation. This is now.

Once again, you've taken an inordinate amount of space to restate the obvious - you still don't get it. Don't feel bad, WKRN and KRON don't quite seem to have a handle on the potential either. But unlike you, they are at least open to the idea of it. That puts them light years ahead of your thinking.

But hey, don't mind me - I'm just some crazy stringer, right? No experience, never worked in a newsroom, has no clue about the real world, does all that sound familiar? Of course it does, it's what you guys do, attack the messenger when you can't argue with the message. Whatever....

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program: "Bashing that which we understand not" already in progress...

 

[Stoney]

NBS, a couple of problems with what you just wrote.

One, you are going after NYC personally (which I thought you had wrote you didn't want to do yet still continue to do). I, for one, don't really want to read about personal attacks on anyone.

Two, stations will send more than one crew for any worthy story whether they are OMB/veejay or not. That is not unique.

Three, live coverage doesn't depend on what type of camera you are using (but I would argue that most coverage sucks with primarily handycam use). Your COFDM technology will work with a Betacam too, you know.

 

[impudentFOX]

Just a devil's advocate point. In the articles I've read on the VJ launches at WKRN and KRON, the stories point out that both GMs are former major market news directors and former photographers. So I guess MR not only got the complete idiots with no experience at corporate to buy into his scheme, but also the complete idiots at the GM level who do have newsroom and field experience. Lots of idiots running things out there. Glad we're just be led by them.

 

[Natural Born Stringer]

Well Stoney, if Street takes what I say as a personal attack that's his problem. I'm merely pointing out the obvious truth - that his posts are nothing more than self gratifying bellyaching based on lots of speculation and damn little fact. If that's insulting then perhaps he needs to stop posting OPINION and start researching FACT.

And furthermore, no one cries a river when I and other VJ proponent's are outright attacked by these same people! So WTF? If you post comments in here, they're fair game dammit! Mine certainly have been, haven't they? No one minded it then. Now all of a sudden it's a bad thing? Hmph.

As for your other comments, on the sending more than one crew thing: Reread what street wrote. His whole premise is based on the ideal that ONE SINGLE person cannot handle a major breaking story. It's been his song and dance all along. So no, he's not seeing it the way you do. He's thinking if all hell breaks loose the desk will just call the closest VJ and expect him to shoot and report it live all by himself. And as for betacams, sure they work too. But can WKRN afford to buy 20 more of them right now? Can they train all the former reporters to use them properly? If you think WKRN video looks awful now, just imagine if all those former non-photog types had to shoot it on betacams! And even if they did shoot it on Beta, people would still pooh pooh the idea - probably starting with "But it costs too much to field 30 betacams!"

 

[Chicago Dog]

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
I think I've got you figured out Street. You like to hear yourself talk. (Followed by a flurry of personal attacks involving someone's opinion about a long-running debate)

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Well Stoney, if Street takes what I say as a personal attack that's his problem.

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Let's see. You insult me FOUR times and I'm the one being ABRASIVE?

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
And furthermore, no one cries a river when I and other VJ proponent's are outright attacked by these same people!

Originally posted by Stoney:
... you are going after NYC personally (which I thought you had wrote you didn't want to do yet still continue to do).

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
... his posts are nothing more than self gratifying bellyaching based on lots of speculation and damn little fact.

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
I hope you'll notice that I'm making an effort to tone that sort of nonsense down here as well. As entertaining as it is to some, it really isn't necessary and I'm man enough to knock it off in the interests of a civil discussion.

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Dick.

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Of course it does, it's what you guys do, attack the messenger when you can't argue with the message.

Edit: I had to add that last comment, because it was a hell of a lot funnier than what I'd originally ended with:

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Gee, I just can't understand why nobody takes me seriously!

[ December 08, 2005, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: Chicago Dog ]

 

[Natural Born Stringer]

Thank you Chili Bean for once again proving my point by posting....(drum roll please)... a personal attack. What. A. Surprise.

Hey at least I'm in good company (KronVJ, VJManager, aught1, Rosenblum, etc.) You've responded to them with the same methods too. So thanks for the compliment.

 

[Chicago Dog]

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Thank you Chili Bean for once again proving my point by posting....(drum roll please)... a personal attack.

What personal attack? If you want to take what I say as a personal attack, that's your problem.

 

[Natural Born Stringer]

Originally posted by Chicago Dog:
What personal attack? If you want to take what I say as a personal attack, that's your problem.

OHHHHHH... I forgot. YOUR rules don't apply to YOU. My bad...

EDIT: You know, after reading that, I realized I'm letting you off FAR too easily. What I really should say is that next time you decide to discredit someone, purposely misquoting them is a surefire way to discredit yourself. That, combined with your utter failure to counter the valid points I made about your friend's and your recent tactics in this forum only serves to further prove me correct. But these are your rules, your expectation of me to conform because you've been a cameraman for the past decade or two and I have not. Isn't that about right? YOu simply cannot handle the thought of someone like me possibly being right, so instead, you start the smear campaign. Have I got it figured out correctly? Since I'm such a noob why don't you set me straight.... because so far I'd say your doing a really lousy job.

[ December 08, 2005, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: Natural Born Stringer ]

 

[impudentFOX]

Stringer, their intent is to populate this site (nay, the world) with people who think like them, agree with them, or are intimidated by them. You have a point of view worth considering. So do the others they seem to have run off. If you leave, the world will be a safer place because one more person with a differing point of view will be banished to silence.

At times I agree with you, but not always. At times I agree with them, but not always. That doesn’t mean either point of view isn’t worth considering. I have worked with many like them in the past. They are bastions of what is good, what is proper, and what is right. They have no doubts and have no room for others points of view. Kind of reminds me of folks who are so confident of what they believe that, well, they might just blow themselves up to prove how right they are. With any luck they can take some of the nonbelievers with them.

Anyway, all this strident self-righteousness is becoming tiresome. I thought we might have a true exchange of ideas, for everyone’s benefit. Adios fellas. Congratulations, you won. Hope you enjoy the brave new world or at least revive the old one.

I’ll be on the sidelines waiting to see who wins, and hoping it’s the bullies. Then again, maybe not.

 

[Chicago Dog]

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
OHHHHHH... I forgot. YOUR rules don't apply to YOU. My bad...

EDIT: You know, after reading that, I realized I'm letting you off FAR too easily. What I really should say is that next time you decide to discredit someone, purposely misquoting them is a surefire way to discredit yourself. That, combined with your utter failure to counter the valid points I made about your friend's and your recent tactics in this forum only serves to further prove me correct. But these are your rules, your expectation of me to conform because you've been a cameraman for the past decade or two and I have not. Isn't that about right? YOu simply cannot handle the thought of someone like me possibly being right, so instead, you start the smear campaign. Have I got it figured out correctly? Since I'm such a noob why don't you set me straight.... because so far I'd say your doing a really lousy job.

Congratulations on your ability to pound away at the keyboard and come up with zero worthwhile content.

The next step awaits you. I know it's intimidating, but you can do it. I've got faith.

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
I realized I'm letting you off FAR too easily.

I had to post that again. It was hilarious! Oooh, you sounded so menacing!

Originally posted by impudentFOX:
So I guess MR not only got the complete idiots with no experience at corporate to buy into his scheme, but also the complete idiots at the GM level who do have newsroom and field experience.

Yeah. MR ranks with wise investments like "numerologists" that evaluate station addresses, right? Sorry, but if that doesn't tell you what the management's like, nothing will.

[ December 08, 2005, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Chicago Dog ]

 

[Natural Born Stringer]

Well not to worry Mr. Fox, it'll take a lot more than the likes of them to run me off. I take too much personal delight in calling them on their BS whenever they post it.

I think in the end both sides will win out. VJ's and traditional crews will coexist, much like they do in England. There will be great photogs and great reporters and great VJ's all working together towards one common goal - informing the viewer. Sure you'll have your few who think traditional crews are a waste of money and you'll have your few who think VJ's are a joke and not to be taken seriously. But those people and their negative attitudes will eventually be the ones run off, and what will remain will be good for everyone.

Till then, the debate rages on....

 

[Baltimore Shooter]

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Hey at least I'm in good company (KronVJ, VJManager, aught1, Rosenblum, etc.)

You call Rosenblum "good company"? No wonder we make fun of you...

Warren

 

[Natural Born Stringer]

Originally posted by Chicago Dog:
The next step awaits you. I know it's intimidating, but you can do it. I've got faith.

Not a bad idea, I just might. While I'm there how about I pick this one up for you?

Consider it an early Christmas present.

Originally posted by Chicago Dog:

quote: Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
So I guess MR not only got the complete idiots with no experience at corporate to buy into his scheme, but also the complete idiots at the GM level who do have newsroom and field experience.

Yeah. MR ranks with wise investments like "numerologists" that evaluate station addresses, right? Sorry, but if that doesn't tell you what the management's like, nothing will.

Umm, I hate to interrupt while your pontificating from your ivory tripod, but *I* didn't write that. ImpudentFox did. D'OH!

Looks like you'll be needing a pair of these as well.

I guess I'm going to need a bigger box...

You know, the sooner you realize that all your doing by posting this sh1t is egging me on, the sooner you can get past the idea that you need to shut down and drive away anyone who doesn't agree with you.

Till then, flame on!

 

[Chicago Dog]

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
Umm, I hate to interrupt while your pontificating from your ivory tripod, but *I* didn't write that. ImpudentFox did. D'OH!

Whoops. Pretty sad -- that's the only thing you've been able to catch me on. Oh well. It's been corrected.

Originally posted by Natural Born Stringer:
You know, the sooner you realize that all your doing by posting this sh1t is egging me on...

I find this to be all very funny, because you have yet to realize that it's the only reason I'm doing it. It's even funnier that it keeps working. Also, it's "you're," not "your." Go pick up that book I recommended earlier. Make good use of it.

And, hey? What's with all the images? Nobody cares.

[ December 08, 2005, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: Chicago Dog ]

 

[sixtycyclehum]

The flexibility of the concept enables journalists to tell stories as they happen, rather than producing a package to be aired hours later after an event occurred.

So VJ's have the uncanny ability to break into network programming and report stories as they happen instead of during an actual newscast?

 

[Stoney]

Originally posted by sixtycyclehum:

quote: The flexibility of the concept enables journalists to tell stories as they happen, rather than producing a package to be aired hours later after an event occurred.

So VJ's have the uncanny ability to break into network programming and report stories as they happen instead of during an actual newscast?

Note that Al is the true originator of the veejay concept, as his right hand is holding the camera while he does everything at once.

[ December 08, 2005, 09:00 PM: Message edited by: Stoney ]