15 Comments Add your own

• 1. discreet_chaos  |  March 29th, 2007 at 11:59 pm

  I don’t have any stats, but as a random guy on the street, I’d say that local tv is and will always be at a disadvantage in terms of submissions.

  First of all, the national sites have a bigger pool, while there’s hundreds of local sites with a limited audience/submission base. And this small base also works against the more cockamamie submissions because they are so localized, there’s a much higher chance that your grandmother or the guy at the drugstore will see the film of you burping the alphabet. While with the national sites, the likelihood exists that no one you know or who might recognize you, your mother or your house will ever see the clip.

  Also and again, I have no statistics, but I’m under the impression that most local video sites actually have to approve the clip before it’s posted. Of course the pretense is that it must be checked for obscenity or blatant advertising, but most T&C pages that I’ve read, also state that the clip must be of interest to a larger audience. So, before it’ll actually be seen by anyone, you have to first impress the person approving the clips and I’m sure that extra step makes some people think twice about submitting.

  After all, if you first have to get past the geek and you may even have to do a site registration with your real name; Then you’re only left with a video that’ll be seen by a tiny handful of people, many of who are your friends, neighbors, the folks from your Garden Club or possibly burglars looking for a rich person to rob.

  That’s why I can easily see the anonymity and instant gratification of the big sites always having an advantage. Plus, again, they have access to the whole pie, not just a small slice, so their numbers will always be greater and Google can afford to be less guarded with their reputation, therefore they don’t have to vet the clips.

• 2. Dave  |  March 30th, 2007 at 5:30 am

  It’s also because they’re primarily asking for news-related things…

  How much of YouTube is “citizen journalism”? Exactly. If you want a larger response, develop a product that people in a younger demo would ACTUALLY send stuff to.

  Maybe a local version of “Funnist Home Videos” is a start…
  The High School sports thing could be another big one.

• 3. invitedmedia  |  March 30th, 2007 at 5:36 am

  “we” are so early in this that it’s not too late.

  but don’t let that be an excuse to do NOTHING either.

  i would suggest reading arrianna huffington’s “news 2.0″ and see that even moving the web from print to video will have its own detractors from within.

  i just read her lastest piece and didn’t see V-I-D-E-O mentioned once.

• 4. Photogonfire  |  March 30th, 2007 at 6:31 am

  Our station tried it last fall and it was like pulling teeth! The viewers mostly misunderstood the idea and submitted story ideas, not videos. The effort was canceled after about 3 months…

• 5. invitedmedia  |  March 30th, 2007 at 6:42 am

  sounds like an excuse to me!

  the great thing about the net is you can try everything knowing most will not work.

  the problem i see clearly is that many are set up in a manner and fashion that they CAN NOT succeed thereby prompting responses like #4.

  i’m not saying that was the case in this instance, but it sure sounds familiar.

• 6. Lisa  |  March 30th, 2007 at 8:01 am

  couldn’t agree more Dave, ugv on the local tv level must be differentiated . the purpose of doing it shouldn’t be to compete with utube, because it will surely fail. local tv stations need to generate local buzz - contests - high school sports - what parent do you know of that wouldn’t want to submit video of their child to a tv station? the contests side of it, funniest videos - community videos - wedding contest videos, etc. it’s developing a ugv local product, not a national portal.

• 7. invitedmedia  |  March 30th, 2007 at 8:34 am

  wouldn’t a “national portal” simply be the by-product of a network of local web channels?

  and a damn good added revenue stream from work you are already producing?

  it’s a monkey-see monkey-do world out there. make it happen in one city and the viral nature of the web will have it spread not only nation wide but globally.

  quit thinking small.

• 8. Z  |  March 30th, 2007 at 10:28 am

  “the purpose of doing it shouldn’t be to compete with utube, because it will surely fail.”

  Bingo

• 9. invitedmedia  |  March 30th, 2007 at 11:01 am

  funny, but the longer we talk about this the less these local web channels appear focused on the NEWS.

  contests, weddings, classifieds, directories… heck, you’d think there’s a refocused effort afoot to recreate the LOCAL portal.

  so much for boisenews.com

• 10. The Tony  |  March 30th, 2007 at 1:58 pm

  Local news has also conditioned the audience to believe that news is supposed to be boring and cliche and repetitive.

  The key is providing a unique experience that, while related to the main station in question, can only be had on this LocalYouTube or whatever it is.

  Now, anybody can post video on the web. It’s no longer cool or unique, so where’s the incentive for posters?

• 11. Steve Safran  |  March 30th, 2007 at 2:10 pm

  I agree with the statement. Part of the reason is that the tech is still beyond most people’s understanding. We’ve only recently reached the point where Mom and Dad can shoot a digital picture, get it onto the computer and then email it. Video is magnitudes harder. In TV, we forget that. It seems easy to us. The audience for whom video is comparatively easy - the younger demo — is not interested in sending stories to local news outlets.

• 12. DrBruce  |  March 30th, 2007 at 3:40 pm

  These are great observations. But with all the cop shows and especially America’s Most Wanter, my guess is that many parents would not WANT their kids on television. People’s perceptions of the Internet often start with porn and then move into less exotic topics. I teach a web site design class at the University of Georgia and can tell you about 10% of the students, mostly women, ask me if they can create a fake web site because they don’t want their face and resume online (part of the assignment).

  Dr. Bruce@Athens

  P.S. How do you start a new topic? I am VERY interested in local TV station managers’ views toward interactive television which is being rolled out right now.

• 13. discreet_chaos  |  March 30th, 2007 at 7:42 pm

  I agree with much of the above;

  The idea of a contest would generate buzz and if the “prize” were to be featured on a weekend afternoon clip show, it’d not only cost very little to promote, but additional income could be derived from the broadcast ads.

  Also, there has to be some definition from the station.

  The idea of contests lends itself to a local YT and the topic could be “managed” with specific categories (i.e. “Hidden Hometowns”, “Hanging-Out”, “Hometown Heroes”, all inaddition to the more “fun” categories)

  And, if the station wants news, they may occasionally get some quality product from a viewer, but they’re never going to get YT numbers. Not only because of the limitation of a small base, but a good video of a tornado or something spectacular would be snapped-up by an outlet, a specialized site, or it’ll be posted to YT to satisfy the voyeurs.

• 14. KrizBiz  |  April 4th, 2007 at 10:40 am

  No one talked about a metric where users who submit newsworthy content get paid for it…talk about an incentive. how about assigning beats to good contributors? What about all those independent photogs out there looking for work?

  And ‘newsworthy’ is defined by how many others view the content. Create communities around the stories and foster more and better submissions by also training and nurturing the best submitters…eventually it becomes self perpetuating in my estimation.

  Most UGC offers are centered around the chance to become famous or get on-air. Cash could be the difference, and worth it if the content gets better, attracts audience and is monetized accordingly.

  This is the ultimate hyper-local play. It also requires the long view, something sorely lacking in broadcasting.
  Newspaper will be doing this effectively first - if I had to bet.

  Definitely not YouTube.

• 15. Jeremiah  |  April 6th, 2007 at 12:14 am

  I see several barriers to UGC adoption for local affiliates: management that doesn’t “get” participatory media (hint: Mt. Rushmore on their homepage), underfunded/trained IT staff, viewer base that is mostly uninterested in participating even given the chance.

  Each of these barriers can be negotiated, of course, but it will require persistent vision on the part of a station manager to make it happen. For example, local affiliates are under constant pressure to reduce operational costs of reporting stories. A station that can attract a participatory audience interested in local issues can significantly increase their investigative footprint: imagine if the guys at TPMCafe had a show on CNN……

  As KrizBiz said - the “long view” is sorely lacking in broadcasting.

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed