The VJ predicament

N

Nino Giannotti

Well-known member
I know I know, not another VJ thread, but this one goes a little deeper, this is about the human factor.

For the last several month, or since I lunched the lighting web site I’ve been getting a little of notoriety, some I was expecting but the some wasn’t. I was glad the lighting site was well accepted and helpful to many in our business but some of the notoriety came from something that I wasn’t expecting, and that’s from my stand against the teaching of Michael Rosenblum. Nothing against the man personally, actually there’s something likable about the guy, but since the day he appeared on this board some five years ago we’ve been going at each other regularly. Our main difference is our philosophy of what it takes to make it in this business. I’m a firm believer of continuing education and training to gain skills, while Michaels called those skills and learning unnecessary and often intrusive. I believe in good equipment and Michael believes that all that is needed is a small automatic camera and a laptop. These are the fundamental differences.

The most damaging predictions that Michael made was that most television programming will be done his way and by people with just enough knowledge and equipment, we, the traditional program makers were done and heading toward history.

Five years ago I told him on this board that his methods of doing business could be financially dangerous. Making it sound too easy will encourage people to make the minimum investment that he recommended, both in equipment and knowledge, and eventually these people will find themselves with maxed out credit cards bills and no income.

Unfortunately too many people that believed in what Michael was saying back then are now in trouble. You really can’t blame them, who would you believe, a NYU professor of journalism or an Italian emigrant.

For several months I’ve been getting dozens, probably close to 100 e-mails from people that made that very mistake and now they want to know if there’s a way out. Many of these people lurk here on B-roll hoping to learn something; they are embarrassed and not ready yet to come out of the closet. They feel betrayed by Michael. I don’t know how many of them took his VJ course and I did not ask, why pour salt on the wound. Many of them must have given Michael money for his training because according to him thousand attended his VJ school here in the US. They feel betrayed not only for the empty promises and predictions that Michael made to them but particularly by him now completely abandoning the entire VJ promise and concentrating instead on the amateur side of the business with no longer making any projection or plans of any revenue, or not even an explanation of what went wrong.

Few months ago I posted this as a joke on one of the many VJ threads:

However, I would like to thank you Michael, you just gave me an idea for a new side business.
”To all you VJ, TJ, CJ or any others Js with cameras. You send me a DVD containing up to 10 minutes of your work and a check for $250.00 (I also take Paypal) and I will teach you (for the next time) how to compose, read the light, create continuity and other essential skills that you did not learn from Michael because apparently he doesn’t have any clue of what they are or he would never allow you to display with pride this type of crappy amateur work home-movies style on TV. So in reality he is doing you a disservice and damaging any future potential for you to make it in this business.
If there are no improvements to be made I’ll cheerfully refund the money with a congratulatory letter.
So after you paid him $2250 to become a VJ or 2350 Euros to become a VJ, for a fraction of that I’ll teach you how to put it all together so you might even start impressing people and even stand a chance of making some money instead of being ridiculed.
Michael sold you a parked car; I’ll give you the fuel to go places (not a bad slogan isn’t it?).”

It was supposed to be a joke but many took it seriously and I’ve been asked ever since if I will ever offer such service. Maybe one day I will, but not in the near future. But I will gladly help anyone who needs help.

I have also started a small business advice thread on EFPlighting.com; http://efplighting.com/?Getting_new_business this is manly to help people with minimum equipment and minimum skills (unemployed VJs). If anyone here has any advice or business ideas at the lowest level please sent it to me at nino@efplighting.com and I’ll post it in the business chapter with your name on it.

Let be nice to them, but only if they want to get better.

So Michael, you broke it, I fix it.
 
This explains why Mike refuses to tell us of any "successful" OMB/VJs. There simply aren't any. He inflates their egos and gives them a false sense of worth in the business -- and surprise, they fall flat on their faces.

As far as news goes, I don't feel bad for these folks. Mike's newsroom experience is quite antiquated: almost thirty years old. He was an associate producer back then. He's never shadowed a field crew a day in his life. He has no idea what the process of newsgathering entails. Instead, he makes a bunch of crap up, adds a sexy buzzword to it, and sells the process to suckers who haven't done their own research -- supposed "journalists."

You wanna be a journalist? Here's your first lesson: do your research. It starts with understanding who your teacher is.

He's attempting to water down the entire business. In the very rare instance one of his OMB/VJs does something he considers to be noteworthy, he parades it around like a kid with an ice cream cone. Remember that thread about some OMB/VJ's video appearing on the Today show? As if that doesn't happen a million times a day with experienced crews?

The other guys -- the ones Mike is brainwashing to convince this entire broadcasting thing is "easy" -- I do feel bad for some of those folks. Mike's got a little experience producing a few series. So, to them, his word is gospel. Again, he gives them exceedingly high hopes and -- as soon as the checks have cleared and the exit sign on the door is lit -- he disappears into the doorway, never to be heard from again.

To those OMB/VJs lurking on the board: the only thing Mike cares about is the check. As soon as you fatten his bank account, you're not important to him anymore. That's the way he works. You've helped him sustain his life in his "apartment in Manhattan" and his "house in the Hamptons," which he has no problem egotistically waving in front of everyone. He thinks you're a sucker, just like those before you.

I'm wondering how many of his failed OMB/VJs attempt posting in his blog only to have him quash the entry before it makes an appearance. Mike barely pays attention to WKRN and KRON. His responses when he's asked about those stations? "I don't know. Why don't you ask them yourself?"

These folks are paying more of a price for these so-called "skills" than they originally thought.

Mike's claimed to have trained thousands of OMB/VJs. That puts experienced, talented folks in the minority. If the OMB/VJ thing was "the next step," it would've happened by now.

It hasn't. It's failed. It's time to put it to bed. Nitey-nite.
 
Chicago Dog said:
He inflates their egos and gives them a false sense of worth in the business -- and surprise, they fall flat on their faces.
Click to expand...

Sounds just like several sales jobs I had when times were tough. They'd tell you what a great product and opportunity you had and tell you there's no limit to what you can do and when you hit the streets or the phone you get nothing. Incredible turnover. They build up everything with hype and the reality was much different. I was too cynical and wise to the world to believe them but many people did. These kids were the same way. They saw something they thought they would like to do and were given a great speech about how they are the future and when they got out in the real world they realized the truth. There's no concern for them now because like in sales, there's always a fresh crop coming in and starting the process over again.
 
Nino, like you, I find something likeable in Michael Rosenblum as well. I also find the VJ model sort of interesting and I think there is a niche for it in the video production universe. I say "niche" because I don't think it will be a tidal wave and, in the end, we are all filling some sort of niche -- local news, network freelancer, sports freelancer, corporate video producer, etc..

I have had a couple of interactions over the past few months that are informative regarding the efforts of young people attempting to break into this business. I will share one of them.

Several weeks ago I got a call from someone at an internet start-up company. They were seeking professionals to hire to make programming for a network they are trying to create on the internet. I accepted an offer to meet with this man because I wanted to get a look at what his company was attempting to do. I wanted to stay current. When I visited him, he showed me his two JVC HDV cameras and (well outiftted) sound packages. He understood that he could hire young people right out of college but that doing so would damn his business to failure because they weren't experienced enough to create a high-quality product. But, as I told him, he had fixed himself in a certain position because he had bought his equipment packages and limited the number of freelancers who would work with him. Camera owners, I said, would probably not be willing to work with his gear because they would have to accept a lower rate. That's when he told me he would pay a premium for professionals. He was willing to pay enough money to hire experienced people to use his cameras so they wouldn't lose money NOT using their cameras.

I gave him a number of names and he has called all of them. Some have started freelancing with him. I don't know how long he can afford to operate this way. In the end, I believe he will need to find a cheaper source of labor. But his dilemma is palpable. Young people coming into this business simply don't have the tools to fill the lower end employment needs. They may know how to operate the cameras and how to use Final Cut Pro. But they don't know how to compose or light. Not do they understand how to handle the myriad situations that cause so much stress -- problem solving in the field, dealing with clients, dealing with issues on location, equipment failure and on and on and on.

The truth is, we didn't know much when we first started either. Several things were different then. Most video production was relatively uniform. In the broadcast world, we used an extremely limited number of cameras. In the begining, they were analog, not digital, so we rarely went inside and manipulated them. Thus, it was easy to master a television camera and we were able to focus on the other facets of the craft -- lighting, composition, client interactions, etc..

Now a kid comes out of college, and because they have studied video production they assume they are ready to go in the professional world of television. What they can't anticipate are the professional nuances their professors, who don't have contemporary real world experiences, cannot teach them. So they are left to fill in the gaps on their own. Except no one is there to educate them. And because we -- the folks with the real world experience -- are using a different level of equipment in a different production milieu, our worlds rarely collide and these newly minted college grads don't have access to what we know. So who has the potential to become more valuable then? Them? Or us?

Television photography is an odd craft. Sure, it's not brain surgery. But if you screw up, even once, there is a good chance that clients won't hire you again. The way you move forward -- develop better skills, cultivate better clients, make more money -- is an incremental and slow process. If you hit a ceiling in your knowledge, you're almost back to sqaure one in that, if you screw something else up, you might not make it past that level. It's a little like playing in a Super Mario world: you can take short cuts, but at some point you'll have to actually show up to a job with real skills. You can only fake so much.

As young people flow into the VJ level, or make things for free for viewing on Youtube, they are certainly gaining valuable knowledge and experience. But unless thay can find a way to make (serious) money, they will never a.) own an equipment package, b.) buy a home, c.) have a family, d.) have health insurance and e.) retire. And trust me, when your ability to have those things is DIRECTLY tied to your skills, then skills become exponentially more important.

I'm not here to assasinate Michael Rosenblum. However, I do think he and the colleges pumping out these graduates are selling a pie-in-the-sky program. New media and new technologies created a real need for additional people in our field. But the academics who are engaged in educating these workers never really understood or appreciated the reality of the craft. If you want quality people doing quality work on quality equipment, they will, in the end, need money. The experience alone of working in television ISN'T enough. Here, as in any other occupation that requires talent, the top end will attract smart and creative people ONLY if there is a financial reward on the other side.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit like home remodeling.

I can do it myself. But it will take a long time. I will make mistakes. And it will look like an amateur did the work.

Or I can pay up front for a pro to do it right - and quickly. It will probably look better, and the investment will pay off when the home is up for sale.

The thing is.... both will continue to be done. Both approaches to home remodeling continue to be used. Some citizens will learn the skills better than others. Some will specialize in small jobs. Others will have large businesses and work on corporate offices. And even some "professional" remodellers will do poor quality and get poor ratings by the Better Busines Bureau.

The fact is, many citizens, newspapers, radios, websites, are moving into this (new VJ and CJ) realm. So the market is there. This is a new, evolving change in our industry. MR is working on his niche. The problem, we all agree, is that MR went overboard on this board, prediciting the death of crews in the field. He probably was caught up too much in his "marketing" efforts. On the other hand, some here may not fully understand the changes taking place in our business, and how they could affect our jobs. Professionals also need to stay current.

I will definately hire a professional to work on my basement. Professionals will have increasing value, when the difference in quality becomes more apparant. (As was shown above by Hiding Under Here.)
 
Tom, at least you are talking about someone who went to college, got his education and has the foundation to get his career off the ground, but read below what Michael is saying on his web site.

He has trained thousands of people and yet he can’t produce any or at least any that is making a decent living, nobody has ever come forward to defend him or his teaching. Those few who support him on his blog are amateurs and still convinced that the revolution one day will happen.

I had a few e-mail exchanges with one of his avid followers, an amateur convinced that one day he’ll put me out of business. He asked me if using a big camera and knowing how to light make me successful, I told him not exactly that, but owning a 4 bedrooms house with pool in a nice area of Florida, putting 3 kids thru college and having a nice cushion for my retirement, all thanks to my camera, is my interpretation of success. I don't need much and for a poor emigrant like myself what I have is plenty good.


From: http://www.rosenblumtv.com/videojournalism.shtml
Since 1988, we have been on the cutting edge of the VJ Revolution.
We have trained thousands of people around the world to express themselves through video. We have converted conventional television networks globally, saving tens of millions of dollars. We have produced hundreds of hours of content in this way.
Today, a broadcast video camera can be had for a few hundreds of dollars if not less. They are lightweight, easy to use, almost point and shoot. Broadcast quality editing rooms which once cost a half million dollars are now a bit of software in a laptop. And they can be operated by any 9-year-old.

This is the Videojournalism
or VJ Revolution.
A single person with a single vision married to inexpensive, lightweight technology. Once this meant a writer and a pencil, a painter and a brush and canvas. Now it means a VJ and a camera and laptop.
Just as anyone can sit down and write a novel once they learn how to read and write, so too can anyone sit down and produce television and video, once they are taught how to do it. This is what we do: an entirely new paradigm for television and video production for an entirely new world of video content and demand: broadcast, cable, broadband, wireless, cellphone and beyond.


BTW Michael, just for the record, I don't know what were you teaching in 1988 but wasn't VJ that's for sure. Back then there were no small automated cameras and the first NLE or desktop computer did not come out until the early 90s and it was considered a non linear editing system, it was not used for final editing because the quality was poor, it was used for off line editing in order to keep the big editing room free to make money. Once the off line editing was done on the NLE then you took the diskette containing the EDL information and put it on you main editor where the actual editing was done with the then conventional methods.
 
"Just as anyone can sit down and write a novel once they learn how to read and write"
...of course they can....of course,it will be crap and won't get published.
 
Well, let's talk about the "fear" aspect in all of this.

I am honestly NOT afraid of the VJ model. How long has it been since Michael Rosenblum's first post? Five years? Okay, five years ago I was very concerned about the future of this business. Of course, I was worried long before that even though demand for freelancers at the networks was at its zenith. Anyone who surveys the cyclical nature of TV viewing habits would have worried that newsmagazines would one day go the way of Who Wants To Be a Millionaire. People would tire of them. So I was concerned that my business, which was predicated on that kind of news production, would suffer if those programs disappeared.

Well, to a large extent those shows have seen their best days and they aren't making them nearly in the quantity they were in the mid-1990s. But I'm still here and last year I worked more days than I have in a decade. I probably would have surpassed last year's total this year had I not injured my ankle. The demand has been enormous. And the demand isn't motivated by me. It's simply BUSY in our neck of the woods. There are more and more production entities cropping up all the time. And those folks cannot take a risk on untested, inexperienced photographers. The ones that do either aren't all that serious, or they get burned from time to time. Also, now with a website, I get calls from all over the world. Tomorrow I will shoot something for a production company in Europe.

More than the VJ, more than small digital formats, more than anything, the internet has changed the world as we know it. And it keeps surprising us with new twists day in and out. The funny thing is, the networks have found ways to grab onto the internet's coattails. I watched ABC's "I-Caught" the other day. I liked it -- a lot. Funnier still is the fact that I have shot several stories for that broadcast. So while the networks adapt to the internet by running stories about what people are doing to feed the internet's need for content, it's generating work for people engaged in my professional niche.

What is that same system doing for aspiring journalists, documentarians and photographers? It's asking them to work for free. No doubt, as with a game of craps at the casino, that risk will pay off for some rare individuals. They will move on to better paying gigs. But those who are left behind, who don't find a rabbi or mentor, will be forced to find other ways to learn their craft. In the end, my guess is the vast majority of wannabes will have to get out altogether.

Television -- the ultimate subprime system.
 
Last edited:
Nino said:
BTW Michael, just for the record, I don't know what were you teaching in 1988 but wasn't VJ that's for sure. Back then there were no small automated cameras...
Click to expand...

Back then Michael had pinned his hopes on 8mm video. The 8mm formats came out in the late 80s. That's what he used at NY1 in the early 90s in his first failure to produce a viable VJ model.

The cameras themselves were small and automated, with auto iris, auto white balance and auto focus. They were marketed as "broadcast quality," but were considered inexpensive when compared to real broadcast cameras. Nonlinear editing was still expensive, but there was a relatively inexpensive editing system for handling Hi8 tapes. Where a traditional editing system involved a minimum of two decks and a controller, the Hi8 system compressed both decks and controller into one inexpensive unit. Just add a monitor, and you had an editing room.

I was just getting started in film around that time, and Hi8 was all the buzz among amateur filmmakers. All these people thought they could use Hi8 to make their independent films and have it blown up to 35mm when they got that big contract with a major distributor. Image quality didn't matter, they proclaimed. Content was what mattered, and if you had a good story it didn't matter if you shot it on 35mm or drew it on flipbooks. Since they all considered themselves to be storytelling geniuses, they all thought they could make their features on Hi8 and break out in the business to make a fortune.

I worked on a few projects with Hi8. The people who chose it were every bit as naive as the legion DV amateurs today. They thought that since it was video, you didn't need to light it. They thought that handheld shakycam was "edgy," the result of teenage years watching too much MTV. They had no idea how to tell a story. The relatively inexpensive Hi8 cameras were supposed to "democratize" the filmmaking process, opening it up to the masses.

Sound familiar?

No, he really has been spouting this nonsense for twenty years. The march of technology has only fed his delusion and given him new footholds every time history has threatened to drop him into the abyss. Every time it fails, he simply embraces a new technology and says his ideas were ahead of their time, but now it will work with these new gadgets. And there are suckers who will continue to believe him.
 
I don't like to resurrect old threads but this one calls for a follow up.

Nino said:
For several months I’ve been getting dozens, probably close to 100 e-mails from people that made that very mistake and now they want to know if there’s a way out. Many of these people lurk here on B-roll hoping to learn something; they are embarrassed and not ready yet to come out of the closet. They feel betrayed by Michael. I don’t know how many of them took his VJ course and I did not ask, why pour salt on the wound. Many of them must have given Michael money for his training because according to him thousand attended his VJ school here in the US. They feel betrayed not only for the empty promises and predictions that Michael made to them but particularly by him now completely abandoning the entire VJ promise and concentrating instead on the amateur side of the business with no longer making any projection or plans of any revenue, or not even an explanation of what went wrong.
Click to expand...

There are thousands of suckers that have handed Michael Rosenblum their last penny to learn to be a VJ because according to him that was supposed to be the future of television, and now they are broke with no work. You would figure that at least Michael would keep a low profile as consideration for all these people, then I found this on his blog this morning.

This guy has the balls of an elephant and the integrity of a roach.
__________________________________________________________________
"From Rosenblum's blog"

Fatal Attraction
September 18th, 2007 • No Comments

Rosenblumsail.jpg


From the Newport Boat Show
She is 76 feet long.
Hand-made by the Brooklin Boat Yard (that would be Brooklin, Maine, not the Brooklyn where I shared a 2-bedroom walk-up apartment once).
Beautiful.
Teak decks
Draws 11 feet with the centerboard down, 6 with it up.
Sleeps 8.
I swore the last time I would never do this again.
I tell you, ….it’s like heroin.
→ No CommentsCategories: Rosenblum
_____________________________________________________________

I don't know if he actually bought this boat or what but this guy has a desperate need of showing off. He has been bragging about the renovation of his Manhattan apartment, bragging about his neighbors in the Hamptons and now this; damn Michael, have some f****ing consideration for these poor people, this is a slap in the face to those who you sucked money from with empty promises and made you a rich man.
 
Congrats Michael!!! Looks like a REALLY nice boat. Watch how all the unsuccessful fear mongers go after you now for being successful.
 
Nino,

I'm not sure about this one.
Your attacking MR hard now...callinging him some wicked names...sizing up his balls...saying he has no integrity...sucking money from people...

Perhaps some of these things are true. But more importantly, perhaps some of them are not true. I have never met Michael, except via the internet.

My advice is to stay focused on the professional debate. If you think he is swindling.... then be careful what you say and how you say it. My two cents. You have been reading his "personal blog" which he has the right to write about anything, including his apartment, and new boat. If you have evidence of him swindling...lets here the evidence. If you are making an accusation, be careful.
 
Guys, I spent hundreds of hours to start a free web site in order to help people gain those skills necessary to at least stand a chance of making it in this business. I did it mostly because Michael 5 years ago called those skills unnecessary to become successful and mostly intrusive. I’ve been getting dozens of e-mail from VJs thanking me for the site. I even started a section on how to get business mostly geared toward those who has very little in terms of gears and knowledge.

Michael started something; he made a lot of promises and predictions with no base or without having any marketing strategy or marketing testing to back up those predictions. He asked for these people to pay him good money in order to get into the presumable wealthy future that he predicted, then he abandoned these people and moved on to other things. According to him over 9000 people took his VJ training at about $2500 each. He did not swindle anyone out of their money, they did it out of their free will, but they paid for empty promises, unfounded and untested marketing projections and now they are paying the price for trusting him. When you make a promise or projection you better be damn sure that you have all the documents to back-up your claims. Do you guys realize that somebody who paid Michael for unfounded and unproven business projections could actually start a class action against him? This is no joke guys, you just can’t go around shooting off your mouth when it involves other people’s money. One thing is charging people for teaching them something but coupling that with unfounded, untested or overinflated promises of a bright future could very well be considered a fraud.

EB, his blog is NOT a personal site, he mixes business and personal affairs and even his personal affairs are directly linked to business. He constantly promotes and talks about his different business ventures and still never misses a chance to bring up that our conventional methods of production are wasteful and obsolete, although lately has been toning that down. He could very well use his blog to also help those people that paid him for empty promises instead of showing off how well he is doing with their money. If left alone he could cause even more damage, by opposing his methods of productions we are giving people the chance of at least investigating if he is worth what he is asking and let them make up their own mind. I we would have done this years ago probably thousand of people would have avoid the financial predicament that they are now in.

LAKE4, there are different ways to measure success. Some measure it by the size of their wallet. My wealth comes from 38 years of marriage, the respect of my 3 children and the future that I gave to them and the respect of my colleagues and friends, all this made possible by my 37 years of dedication to this business. I have nothing against Michael personally and I will take on (verbally) anyone that tries to put down my profession. Somebody has to do it.
 
Good points Nino,

As for his blog... he writes what he writes...and he can write whatever he wants. He got a nice boat. Good for him. I understand, he ties it into his business. Oh well. His perogative.

People go to college...and spend a lot more than $2,500. Some of them succeed (financially, personally, professionally) Some do not succeed (financially, personally, professionally.

The VJ movement is real. It is here. There are thousands of young people buying gear, computers and publishing on the net. It is just the beginning. These are facts. Many want to learn. They will pay people like Michael. Some will succeed. Others will not. Just like in the big camera business.

Both approaches are valid. Both will make money for those talented and smart enough to succeed. Michael has produced nationally recognized television content, and continues to. Websites from very small...to very large...will be hiring more and more small camera solo video journalists...and content providers...and paying them very little...to a lot of money.

I have no problem debating the merits of different approaches. I agree with some things Michael says, and disagree with others. Same with things said here. I am not trying to argue one side...just trying to keep it sane.
 
The VJ concept COULD work but only if those training to be VJ's learn from those who ACTUALLY DO THE JOB. Lets put it this way, if you want to be a news photographer but have never used a camera before in your life who are you going to learn from? Option 1: A photographer who goes out in the field and turns stories everyday. Option 2: A producer who sits behind a desk and has never held a camera or done a live shot in his/her life. My guess is you'd want to learn from a photographer. Why o why then would you think that you could learn to be a VJ from someone who's never himself done the job??? That is just ignorant. VJ's definitely could have their place in news but ONLY if they were trained by experienced photographers AND reporters. Michael, much like most newsroom managers and consultants in the business today, is nothing more than a used car salesman.
 
I was enjoying the LACK of VJ discussion, so I could have done without the resurrection. You might just as well have sat on that tidbit until someone inevitably brought it up again.

FMc
 
I don't have any real direct insight, but I'm guessing that the still photo side of things is experiencing something similiar, though perhaps without a MR.
 
I’m not convinced about the ignore function. For a long time I was going to put the Mighty Dyckerson on my ignore list but now compared to Lake he seems like the paragon of all wisdom.

When I worked for ITN in the UK they put out a memo saying that they were not to employ anyone on a casual or full time bases who had worked at Channel One. This was in response to the high number of ex Channel One workers that had turned out to be a total disaster in the newsroom. It was draconian and totally unfair as not all of the Channel One refugees were Muppets, in fact one or two were very good but we were told that the BBC had done the same so...
The irony here being that the appallingly bad Channel One was one of Michael Rosenblum’s “beautiful failures” and while the people who tried to make it work were branded industry lepers Michael went on to be hired by the BBC to run a 5 year course for them $$$$

The world isn’t fair or just.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top