Results matching “to provide journalism train”

Russian news agency, RIA Novosti, is investing in training programmes to improve staff skills as an anti-crisis measure, it was announced in a press release.  

In January and June of this year, the news agency ran a series of lectures and seminars to train staff in multimedia technology for video recording and photo imaging, infographics, Internet search engines, "black PR" and legal risks in the media. The training culminated in two-week multimedia courses held at a summer school in the Moscow region. The classes, which started on June 20, are being held in the form of business games. "While the agency like anyone else is affected by the negative consequences of the economic crisis, we cannot allow ourselves not to invest funds in improving the skills of our staff," RIA Novosti Editor-in-Chief Svetlana Mironyuk said.

Even as online media consumption habits change, traditional journalists train in new media and new departments emerge, incorporating video journalism continues to be a challenge. How long should the videos be? Should they support text stories or be considered separate pieces entirely? How do you deal with translation? Or translate the complexities of a story, even in the same language?

The Poynter Institute recently caught up with Emmy-nominated video journalist, Travis Fox, to discuss best practices in creating web-based video.

What follows is an edited transcript of what appears on the Poynter Institute's website.  

Al Tompkins: How does video help this story?

Travis Fox: I think you're getting at the relationship between the video and the related article? ... Many of my pieces are aired on PBS, so they need to stand on their own, with their own reporting and context. This is a challenge for us on the Web, because we don't want to totally duplicate the reporting that's in the article, but at the same time we need to provide enough context in the video so when viewers come first (or only) to the video they fully understand the story. It also makes an interesting study of the differences of reporting for video and articles ... but that's another question for another time.

This story could be so complicated that nobody would read or watch it, but you simplified it to "Rwandian Women Emerge As Business Force," which is a story that has appeal far beyond those interested in foreign affairs. How do you think about the focusing and clarifying process when you are working on a story?

Fox: I would hope that all of the pieces I do have appeal beyond those interested in foreign affairs, or whatever topic I'm working on. It's difficult to go into the kind of detail you're talking about in short-form video, period. What works well in video -- namely characters and emotions -- has universal appeal no matter the story. When I do a complicated story (and every story is complicated), I have to fully understand the nuances of the story to know how to produce it in video from. This means I'm often doing interviews on background and doing interviews without the camera rolling just to find the right character to base the story around. It's a kind of casting process. In some ways, it's two processes: the journalism and the video production.

People always ask you about your gear and editing/transmitting process, so let's get that one out of the way.

Fox: Yes, let's do. I use the Sony high-definition video camera, but hope my editors soon buy me that new Sony that doesn't have tapes so I don't have to capture anymore. I edit on a Mac laptop with Final Cut Pro. I almost always transmit via hotel Internet, but if I'm in an out-of-the-way place I use a satellite phone transmitter.

A lot of online photojournalists like to use natural-sound-only pieces, but increasingly, it seems, your stories look more like a marriage of National Public Radio and documentary TV. When is it best to use a reporter track, and when is it more effective not to?

Fox: Thank you for that. I think it's always more effective to produce pieces without narration, but it's more difficult for a couple of reasons. First, most of the pieces I produce are in a foreign language, and I've found a translated audio track doesn't have the same connection with viewers as one in English, even if the content of the voice is the same. Much about the settle nuances of delivery are lost in translation. Secondly, I often find good characters with good stories to tell, but they just don't give you the sound bites you need to build a bed of quotes that takes the place of narration. Often these characters aren't concise enough, or their pacing is too slow. Lastly, I feel that I'm increasingly trying to tell more complicated stories -- ones that are based less around a central character -- and those require me to write narration to tie it all together.

What is the next big step online video will take that will improve journalism?

Fox: One thing I think we should be looking at is video going offline. Let me explain: We will see the Internet used more as a means of delivery, as opposed to a medium (the Web). At washingtonpost.com, we've already seen this in the huge increase of traffic to our various video podcasts on iTunes. Not that podcasts are the future, but the technology of delivering video to several devices, like your phone -- and especially your TV -- is. ... In short, it's the hub model. We are becoming a production company that creates work that goes out in many directions like spokes on a wheel -- to your computer, your phone, your TV. And let us not forget, your morning newspaper.

This piece is close to 10 minutes long. What are you learning about the ideal length for video stories? What keeps people watching online?

Fox: I get this question often, and almost always from my friends in TV, where time is everything. This is one of the big differences between Web video and TV. We talk about pacing, about character development, context -- not so much about time. That's not to say we don't care about videos dragging on or becoming redundant, we do, but we let the story dictate the time, not the time dictate the story. We hope quality video journalism keeps the viewers watching.

On TV, if viewers lose interest with a story, they change the channel and you've lost them. If viewers lose interest with a video online, they often just click on the next video, or maybe go to an article or blog on the same site. We haven't lost them as viewers like on TV.

Also, the advertising model right now is that the ad runs before the video. From a business viewpoint, if viewers watch two minutes or 10 minutes, it's the same advertising impression. Of course, less viewing adversely affects the important "time on site" metric, so we'd prefer they stay and watch the whole video.

I'm not trying to say that every video we do should be a long documentary. We need to have a balance between all the types of videos we do, but saying that every video should be a minute and 30 seconds long doesn't make sense online. The Web is a different beast, and the more we learn about viewers' habits -- which are still developing as technology like podcasting changes -- the better we can meet their needs. We just need to be careful not to apply the same technical standards from any traditional media to new media.

Source: Poynter Institute

In this section, John Zogby, CEO of Zogby International, and George Brock, World Editors Forum President and editor of the Saturday Times in the UK, comment on the results of the 2008 Newsroom Barometer. Both agree that the results show editors have opened to the new necessities of the digital age, while remaining strongly conscious of the possible threats to their newspapers and journalism.

(View the main results to this year's survey here.)

According to Brock, this year's survey points to the fact that "editors remain confident about a mixed-media future and have quietly got on with the business of integrating their newsrooms," but this is "tempered by anxiety that newspapers are not investing enough in recruitment and training for the future."

The path is clear for many editors: integrate the newsroom, think multimedia, train or hire a team of multi-skilled journalists. So are the threats: lack of investment, lack of training, lack of cultural change.

In the face of these deep changes for the newspaper industry and its organization, editors may often face managerial resistance to undergo these investments. But media companies must be bold. Their editors, for the most part, are ready to be. Said Brock: "I read the message of this year's Newsroom Barometer as an appeal from editors to their companies to be bold in the face of change and as a sign that they themselves intend to make the most of new opportunities."

For Zogby, who goes into more detail about the numeric results (see below), this year's results show that editors have adapted or are adapting to the current redefinition of the 4th Estate, the press, in light of the changes brought in part by the Internet.

"Perhaps the most important finding to emerge from the 2008 survey is that editors remain optimistic about the futures of their papers," as was the case for the previous edition of the Newsroom Barometer, wrote Zogby.

Yet this optimism shouldn't hide the urgency for newspapers to rethink their model. "For these editors the future is self-evident and our survey shows that they see the writing on the newsroom wall.  The evolution of the 4th Estate is no longer questions of if, when or how.  Editors now know the solution:  Innovate.  Integrate.  Or perish."

Read Brock and Zogby's full comments below.

Comments on the 2008 Newsroom Barometer by George Brock

Editors remain confident about a mixed-media future and have quietly got on with the business of integrating their newsrooms. The optimism is not universal and it is tempered by anxiety that newspapers are not investing enough in recruitment and training for the future.

Newspaper managements might reply that investment remains risky when it isn't yet clear where the income from digital publishing is supposed to come from. But newspaper businesses are made by content which creates and sustains demand. The first newspapers did not come about when someone assembled advertising platforms, distribution networks and hardware and afterwards looked for content to put into that system.

The sequence of events was the reverse. Somebody wants to tell as many people as possible something of interest or importance, discovers a sustained curiosity in that information or opinion and eventually a publishing operation grows up to supply the demand. The chain reaction is sparked by interest in the story, view, picture, interview, column, cartoon that's on offer. Without that first moment of ignition, nothing else happens.

You think this sounds a little basic? It is. But you would be surprised how often this simple reality is forgotten as today's media businesses struggle to adapt to a world in which digital technology is rewriting the economics of news publishing.

Online news and opinion has now been with us for long enough to see that no prediction about the future of news which is based on technology alone can tell us the future. Newspapers are not just ink marks on squashed trees: they are what people trust, they amuse people, in short they are a collection of ideas and information with which a reader forms a relationship. Where journalism - whether professional, citizen or any mixture of the two - creates that relationship, something lasting is born and can be sustained. You can see examples of success and failure both online and in print. As the first flush of online innovation and enthusiasm wears off, we can see more clearly that some of the online successes will grow very big indeed, but that only the best will prosper. Making information available - and the web makes it available as never before - does not make it wanted. Newspapers which innovate and adapt will also survive because their qualities are more important than the medium. Some of the failures in both online and print will be terminal.

I read the message of this year's Newsroom Barometer as an appeal from editors to their companies to be bold in the face of change and as a sign that they themselves intend to make the most of new opportunities. Most editors are clear that the essential qualities of good journalism can adapt to a new medium. They accept as a fact needing no further debate that their papers will now reach their constituency by several channels and not by one.

Redefining the 4th Estate: Opinions of the Editors by John Zogby

In the 550 years since the first pages of print rolled off the presses in the Bavarian town of Mainz, printed news evolved relatively unimpeded.  Even the invention and proliferation of radio and television failed to stymie the growth of newspapers, largely due to the ability of newspapers to provide more in-depth coverage.
    
The centuries-long hegemony of the ink and paper news model today faces its greatest threat--the advent of an independent and free Internet-based media.  This threat was evidenced at the height of the 2005 British elections with the publication of the 'Downing Street Memo' by The Sunday Times.  That short but potent document presented potentially damning evidence surrounding the planning in the run-up to the Iraq War, and while British papers seized the story, the leaked memo made only slight ripples in the American print media.  It did create, however, a surge within the rapidly developing blog community who used the lack of traditional media coverage as a call to arms.

Now, as the Internet struggles to define itself in the shadow of the Fourth Estate, the question remains: will these two mediums continue to battle for supremacy or will they find stability in an integrated symbiotic relationship? To help bring clarity to this question, Zogby International was commissioned by the World Editors Forum and Reuters to survey 704 newspaper editors worldwide for the second in a series of annual 'Newsroom Barometer Surveys.'

    Perhaps the most important finding to emerge from the 2008 survey is that editors remain optimistic about the futures of their papers.  As in the 2006 Newsroom Barometer, nearly all editors (84%) are optimistic about the future of their paper.  The editors surveyed are as aware of what the future may hold for their industry as they are unified in their recognition of the underlying threats and potential solutions.

The Future

    The majority of editors (56%) now believe that most news (print and online) will be free in the future--up from 48% in 2006.  Nearly two-in-three editors (63%) believe that within a decade the most common form of  news consumption will be some form of electronic media--whether online (44%), mobile (12%) or through newer electronic media like e-papers and tablets (7%).  Less than a third (31%) believe print will remain the most common form of consumption.

    The perception of editors with respect to the future is not limited to the news product itself.  The overwhelming majority (83%) agree that within 5 years their nation's journalist workforce will be expected to know how to produce content for all platforms (e.g., print, video, audio and web).  Still, perception of the future is but one dimension of the story -- the remainder is defined by the threats to the industry and  how editors address those threats. 

The Threats

    By-and-large editors agree on the nature of the threats posed to their industry.  The decline in youth readership (58%), the rise in Internet and digital media (38%) and the lack of editorial innovation (36%) all speak to the consensus that change is imminent.  These editors tell us their chief sources of pressure are from advertisers (22%), shareholders (20%) and political forces (19%).  All pressure, no doubt,  to confront the changing reality through innovation and integration. 

    On one issue editors paint a mixed picture--the current state of their newsroom.  For some (39%) circulation in the past year is up; for others (29%) it is down.  One-third of editors (33%) have added journalists, a quarter have lost journalists (24%) and for the rest (42%) the number of journalists on their staff remains unchanged from a year ago. 


The Solutions

    When a majority of editors (54%) report that they have an integrated newsroom, they may make such statements not necessarily based on the reality, but also out of necessity.  Regardless of whether integration has or has not occurred, nearly all (86%) agree that it will be the norm in the near future.  Editors also agree on the steps needed to address other threats.  Asked what investments they would make in their newsroom given the opportunity, the top two investments cited--training journalists in new media (36%) and recruitment of new journalists (31%)--demonstrate that editors are looking to make a commitment to the future.  And with the recognition that editorial innovation is needed, 69% of editors agree that opinion and analysis pages will play an increasingly larger role in the future. 


Yes, editors are optimistic about the future of their papers, but they are also aware of the potential danger on the horizon.  Less than half (45%) believe the quality of journalism will improve over the next year.  More than a quarter (28%) believe the quality will worsen; a finding reflected in the high level of importance editors place on the need for investment in training and recruitment. 

For these editors the future is self-evident and our survey shows that they see the writing on the newsroom wall.  The evolution of the 4th Estate is no longer questions of if, when or how.  Editors now know the solution:  Innovate.  Integrate.  Or perish.


Read Part 1: Presentation - main results, the integrated newsroom will be the norm
Read Part 2: Multimedia, multi-skilled and integrated
Read Part 3: The future of the press
Read Part 4: Who participated in the survey?
Read Part 5: Comments by John Zogby and WEF President George Brock
Read Part 6: Threats to newspapers, areas of investment, more results

CNN will not modify its content or train its journalists for mobile phones in the near future, according to an announcement from Laurel Chamberlain, director of digital media for news at Turner Media, at the DNA 2008 conference.

"There are always ways of looking at how we can condense what we put onto mobile, but at this stage I don't think its necessary," Chamberlain said.

CNN also ruled the possibility experimenting even preliminarily with mobile news. "Maybe in another five years when we are only thinking about the mobile space," Chamberlain said.

Other news organizations around the world have begun experimenting with mobile news, including the Manchester Evening News and the China-based China Daily. Reuters too has struck a business deal with Nokia for its mobile journalism ventures.

Moreover News International is currently developing a system to measure mobile content traffic. The Sun, The Times, and News of the World are among the publications participating in the Leadership in Mobile plan, which aims to implement the measurement system, and provide media organizations with accurate mobile traffic figures.

Certainly mobile phones are becoming better equipped to handle mobile content, but the jury is still out if 3G capabilities will actually translate to widespread viewing of mobile content.

Mobile news has its proponents, with some arguing that it is the future of news. Other media organizations, however, are not so sure. CNN clearly doesn't view mobile news as necessity. The Daily Mirror gave it a go, and opted in January to pull its mobile site.

At this juncture, its unclear if mobile news advocates are wasting their time, or if its critics are missing the boat. Only time will tell if mobile news becomes the next big trend, or goes the way of virtual newspapers.

Source: Journalism.co.uk (here and here)

The Swedish paper Svenska Dagbladet recently spoke with Anne Spackman, editor-in-chief of the Times of London, about a new job in her newsroom, the "Search Editor", charged with teaching the newsroom staff about how people surf the Web and how to maximize their content's potential of being found by search engine spiders (Search Engine Optimization (SEO)). The job description is logical. But it should be a requirement for all newsroom staff.

The Agence France-Presse launched the AFP Foundation on Sep. 13, to train journalists in developing countries and give assistance to various organizations in media training.

As most newspaper stories contain figures and numerical facts, it would make sense to train journalists how to read correctly through numbers and reduce mistakes – especially considering that journalists aren’t typically adamant about math.

Halfway through 2007, decreasing online revenue growth leaves shareholders worried and advertisers apprehensive.  Still, others insist that the online revolution does not necessarily sound the death knell of print journalism and that the industry should take note of current trends and adjust its image and mission accordingly.  Two recent assessments from Rick Edmonds from Poynter Online and Allen Neuharth from USA Today highlight important concerns of which we should be aware.

If the internet puts the entire world at your fingertips, it also provides great benefits in your own backyard.

How consumers are using the internet for local information, products and services, and why on-line newspapers are the best-placed medium to assist them, is the heart of a session on "New Local Strategies and Opportunities" at the World Digital Publishing Conference, to be held in London on 26 and 27 October next.

Newspapers the world over continue to adopt citizen journalism techniques to include the reader in the news process. One of the latest developments comes from Peru's daily, El Comercio, which has begun to integrate photographs from readers into its website and print edition. The Editors Weblog asked the paper's web editor, Juan Carlos Lujan, a few questions about the project in an email interview.

The French television group, Canal Plus, a division of Vivendi Universal, has struck a deal with SFR, a leading French mobile phone provider, according to the International Herald Tribune. For a 7 euro a month charge tacked on to their cellular bill, customers will now be able to use their 3G mobile phones to scan about 20 Canal Plus channels. Subscribers are expected to use the new technology whenever they have a spare minute, mostly during their daily commute and in between meetings.

So how will newspapers be affected?

The French television group, Canal Plus, a division of Vivendi Universal, has struck a deal with SFR, a leading French mobile phone provider, according to the International Herald Tribune. For a 7 euro a month charge tacked on to their cellular bill, customers will now be able to use their 3G mobile phones to scan about 20 Canal Plus channels. Subscribers are expected to use the new technology whenever they have a spare minute, mostly during their daily commute and in between meetings.

So how will newspapers be affected?

The French television group, Canal Plus, a division of Vivendi Universal, has struck a deal with SFR, a leading French mobile phone provider, according to the International Herald Tribune. For a 7 euro a month charge tacked on to their cellular bill, customers will now be able to use their 3G mobile phones to scan about 20 Canal Plus channels. Subscribers are expected to use the new technology whenever they have a spare minute, mostly during their daily commute and in between meetings.

So how will newspapers be affected?