Folks don’t hate news anchors more on the internet, they just don’t want someone telling them what to watch (voice of god?). A newscast with various stories probably won’t do well online because people want to pick and choose their stories….That combined with the fact that they can get the same thing by either reading the news on your site or watching the individual story clips.

With that said I think there has to be a solution to this. We’ve all heard and maybe even tried to create an interactive show that allows you to skip stories. But there just isn’t a clear reason as to why someone would want to do that over just picking clips. I agree that it is a waste of resources to spend time putting together a newscast when that person (or people) could be on the streets creating content. Did I mention anchor and produce a Midday Update on our site every day?

Back in the 70s, most television stations had in-house editorialists and a lot of the fringe groups would record a “message of the day” on their new-fangled gadget (an answering machine), which they’d invite their followers to dial-in to listen.

Zefrank may not be sponsored by any single group, but he still comes from his particular point-of-view and as far as us old-timers are concerned, the distribution is all that’s new.

Congratulations! I believe I gave the webcast a sample, back when LR posted about its debut and I’ll have to give it another look-see, now that they’ve found their rhythm.

As for the subject of webcasts, I generally watch when there’s something of interest and when I’m looking context. Clicking individual stories sometimes doesn’t get you the anchor’s intro and it rarely covers the aspects which doesn’t have a full video package, plus it’s only for the “big” stories.

I probably watch local newscasts on the web more than most people and I know that I watch them originating from a larger variety of places. As has been said, it’s relavtively pain-free and it’s a service to the viewer. If you can come up with something better, then by all means, send out a press release, but I’m sure the “better” will soon become old hat.

I tend to agree with Cory that it needs to be unique, but even then, people are adverse to watching (and listening) to video while at work, which is where a lion’s share of viewing occurs.

The trick is going to be finding video *news* content that makes it worth taking time out of your day (and your regular web surfing) to watch a linear product.

Anyone doing a news webcast needs to ask themselves this: What does this webcast add to our news that isn’t in our traditional text/photo/short clip product? Does that added value outweigh the user’s convenience lost from browsing the news in a non-linear fashion?

If your webcast is simply a summary of everything that’s new on your website in the last x hours, don’t bother. I can find that faster in text. If your webcast is useless or old after 3 hours, don’ bother. The value of video content comes from the archived views you get in the next week, month, and year. That goes triple for podcasts, which you know won’t be viewed right away.

Use traditional text stories for breaking news. Sure, use live streams if there’s something to look at, but that’s the exception for the moment. If you’re going to commit resources to web video content, make sure it has a long shelf life.