Video: cheap and unskilled, or costly and high-quality?
Newspapers must clearly define who will shoot video, who will edit it, and how it will be distributed to viewers. Colin Mulvany, multimedia editor at The Spokesman-Review, explains the process he goes through to implement a video strategy at the paper.
There are currently two common approaches for newspaper video: one, supported by newspaper commentator Howard Owens, puts the video cameras in the hands of reporters and this draws viewers because they want to see video, notwithstanding of the production quality. The training, shooting and editing time are limited, and video equipment mainly consists of cheap handheld devices.
The other approach, is “driven by quality production values, with in-depth storytelling that is shot and edited by people with strong visual sensibilities,” according to Mulvany. In other words, costs are higher, so is production time, but the videos produced are of higher quality – this is Mulvany’s preferred approach.
Note that these approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A newspaper can use a little of both.
In fact, Mulvany’s current task at the Spokesman, as for all editors implementing video, is “to find that synergy of volume without dumbing down the quality of the storytelling.”
This step first implies changes in workflows and mentalities. Editors must learn how to think visually about stories they assign if reporters are to shoot video, and this can be an extra workload on journalists.
One must then choose what type of equipment to use. Cheap cameras are more accessible and portable, but their quality (especially audio) is much inferior. Mulvany’s preferred cameras: hard-drive based video cameras with small shotgun microphones.
Thirdly, the multimedia editor must provide a video training workshop for web producers and mobile journalists, in which they learn fundamentals of production and editing. Other reporters must also be trained, simply because “Most of the bad reporter produced video I’ve seen suffers from a basic lack understanding of how to shoot video properly,” says Mulvany.
And last but not least, the editor needs to motivate staff about video storytelling, and convince journalists that video can improve their coverage.
Also have a look at our 3-part series on video:
Video: how far does it go? Part 1 – The 2007 boom
Video: how far does it go? Part 2 – Figaro, from Handycam to in-house studio
Video: how far does it go? Part 3 – Nouvel Obs: TV-like shows, with an edge
Source: Mastering Multimedia
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Video: cheap and unskilled, or costly and high-quality?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2107









Leave a comment