13 Comments Add your own

• 1. Scott Bateman  |  March 20th, 2008 at 2:45 pm

  Newspapers have done poorly with producing hyperlocal content for their Web sites. The problem is that the audience for such content simply isn’t big enough to justify all of the labor that goes into it.

  Quite a few hyperlocal startups have failed or cut back as well. It’s hard to see that they will be happy with their results.

• 2. Rosenblum  |  March 20th, 2008 at 3:37 pm

  The trick here is to cut the cost of production so that even with a relatively small audience for hyperlocal the operation still remains not only cost effective, but profitable. The VJ model allows us to do just that.

• 3. DW  |  March 21st, 2008 at 7:34 am

  Probably will be as great as the so-called VJ model at Young Broadcasting, eh?

• 4. Rosenblum  |  March 21st, 2008 at 9:09 am

  I believe that both KRON and WKRN are still working in the VJ model, as is KGTV and so now is WUSA, with more to come. So yes, I expect that it will be as successful, if not more so. I also note that video at The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times and many other papers is also being produced by VJs. No one in their right mind would hire a conventional crew to produce video for a newspaper and as both newspapers and television migrate to the web, they become direct competitors, so I expect that the transition will only accelerate.

• 5. TR  |  March 21st, 2008 at 9:26 pm

  The “hyperlocal startups” that have failed are the ones that aren’t truly hyperlocal - big national or regional aggregators who pretend that aggregating content is the same as being hyperlocal. It ain’t. This effort sounds similar to those My site’s proof (among a growing number of others) that there’s a market for hyperlocal content - if it’s truly based in the community it covers, and produced by people who know that community and can credibly report about it - but as one commenter notes, you do have to keep production costs low. And it can be done! You don’t have to fall into the old-media trap of some giant staff.

• 6. RG  |  March 22nd, 2008 at 9:30 am

  Yep, when the VJs want a health plan and a 401k and move out of mom’s basement. That’s when costs go up.
  If any group is ripe for unionization, its a VJ.

• 7. Rosenblum  |  March 22nd, 2008 at 9:58 am

  I am pretty sure the VJs at KRON, KGTV, KUSA, The New York Times, The LA Times, The Washington Post, The BBC and so on all have both 401ks and health plans. When you cut the fat out of the staffing, there is plenty to go around for those who actually do productive work.

• 8. RG  |  March 22nd, 2008 at 1:50 pm

  To succinctly answer the query, do the people Verizon contracts from you have benefits like medical and 401k’s?

• 9. Rosenblum  |  March 22nd, 2008 at 2:12 pm

  To succinctly answer the question, no.
  But they are not working for Verizon. They are working for me.

• 10. FP  |  March 22nd, 2008 at 9:33 pm

  Cheap Bastard.

• 11. Carl  |  March 23rd, 2008 at 7:51 am

  Not only do they not get benefits, they are being paid $30,000 a year to live and work in and around Washington D.C. Sounds like a liveable wage no?

• 12. Rosenblum  |  March 23rd, 2008 at 8:02 am

  I don’t think I forced anyone to come and work for me, and I have far more applicants than I can employ, with more coming every day. This is a first job for kids out of school, and I think its a pretty good deal and a great experience. I don’t think starting wages at market 125 are better, in fact I think they’re about half.

• 13. Carl  |  March 23rd, 2008 at 9:07 am

  yes but what is the cost of living in market 125

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed