13 Comments Add your own

• 1. tdc  |  July 30th, 2007 at 10:20 pm

  rather than put more cameras on the streets of milwaukee they are instead rearranging the deck chairs.

  AHOY!

• 2. John Proffitt  |  July 31st, 2007 at 1:20 am

  TDC - It’s the same thing in public media, especially local public TV. We’re still trying to recover 1985. Those were some sweet, sweet years. Maybe if we wish a LITTLE harder…

• 3. Z  |  July 31st, 2007 at 5:43 am

  I would think they would be able to compete, given that most newspapers have more people than all or most of the stations in the market combined.

  But it seems to me that, as far as online video goes, there’s lots of room at the table for everyone. It’s all on-demand, so if someone’s looking, odds are they aren’t going to limit themselves to one voice.

• 4. Jason  |  July 31st, 2007 at 6:05 am

  I agree with Z. I don’t know of anyone who surfs local websites hungry for video. In fact, I know a lot of people who DON’T watch video at work, because they’re in open cube environments without headphones.

  Still: if the newspaper can provide unfiltered raw video, people may find that appealing.

• 5. Jason  |  July 31st, 2007 at 6:07 am

  I agree with Z. I don’t know of anyone who surfs local websites hungry for video. In fact, I know a lot of people who DON’T watch video at work, because they’re in open cube environments without headphones.

  My point is: no one wins the video war. People are lookiing for information. If the newspaper provides the best information online along with compelling video offerings, then perhaps there’s no reason for people to click on local TV websites. TV stations don’t need to improve their video offerings online: they need to provide more compelling, unique, easy to digest information.

• 6. tdc  |  July 31st, 2007 at 6:08 am

  “i don’t know of anyone who surfs local… for video”

  BS

• 7. Rob  |  July 31st, 2007 at 7:47 am

  The thing about newspapers is that they aren’t shackled to the conventions of broadcast news.

  Their video isn’t being repurposed from another medium online; it’s being built exclusively for online. Not having to fill a specific time frame for a newscast is pretty liberating as well; their video packages can be as long as the subject warrants. And, without having to worry about the next newscast, they can probably take a little more time to polish their video packages before posting to the web.

  That, and the whole idea of making all their staff photographers videographers and putting more cameras on the street than the TV stations … newspapers that go the same route as the Trib may end up very competitive with the TV stations.

• 8. Joe  |  July 31st, 2007 at 9:10 am

  Yes, newspapers aren’t shackled to our techniques that we’ve honed over decades. They love to let soundbites run on for 45 secs.-1:30 mins. past the point of relevance. Don’t get me wrong. I’ve seen some great stuff coming out of a newspaper web operation. I’ve mostly seen crap though. Now have I seen crap coming out of a TV station? Oh, sure. But not nearly as much as I used to. Because we’ve learned from our mistakes. Our paper collegues are remaking our old mistakes.

  My point is, just because a newspaper can do video doesn’t make it good video. It’ll take time before they have any video with consistency or relevance. However, at the same time they are evolving, they are slowly, step by step, losing what protected them for years from any serious direct competition. Newspapers don’t know how to do breaking news. They are having to relearn it. And as they do, they become no different than any other website, whether it comes from a paper, TV or radio station, or it is its own entity. And that’s what’s going to make the difference.

• 9. Michael Gay  |  July 31st, 2007 at 9:35 am

  Interesting comments Joe. Part of me thinks a smart newspaper would hire managers from TV stations to handle their online video efforts. In the case of the Chicago Tribune, they own WGN and CLTV, both who produce many hours of news every day. Tribune has people available to them who understand video.

  Whenever I talk about great newspaper video operations, I point to NaplesNews.com. I have never seen a better newspaper webcast than Studio 55 - http://www.naplesnews.com/studio55/

  Studio 55 is better than almost any local TV station’s webcast too.

• 10. Joe Gannon  |  July 31st, 2007 at 10:23 am

  I guess, Michael, that maybe we shouldn’t be talking about newspaper vs. TV websites (even though, that’s what they are right now) because they are all evolving into news websites or media websites. It doesn’t matter if you’re a newspaper, TV, radio, or the guy down the street. We can all write text, post video, make podcasts, you name it. The old silos of protectiveness are coming down fast, despite the desparate efforts of some to keep them up. We’re all going to be in the same online silo whether we like it or not. And everybody’s going to be in there: NY Times, Washington Post, MSNBC, Monster, Matt Drudge, eBay, Digg, Fark, eBaum, blogs large and small, one big free-for-all.

• 11. tdc  |  July 31st, 2007 at 10:46 am

  not only shouldn’t we be talking newspaper or tv website we should be talking newspaper or tv web ‘channels’.

  that “protectiveness” is coming down fast also, despite the efforts of many.

• 12. JoeMo  |  July 31st, 2007 at 1:59 pm

  generate lots of video, podcasts, live streams, syndicate it everywhere - just get it out there and let the consumers decide the who/what/when/where/how’s. Things are changing, too many people are holding on to tradition instead of creating a new one. The only way to win is to do everything possible to make sure that as many people as possible see your content in hopes they come back for more.

• 13. William  |  September 8th, 2007 at 6:00 pm

  %0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0AHi%21+Definitely+nice+and+neat+site+you+got+there.n

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed