Is narrative video worth the time it takes to produce it?
Posted on November 27, 2007 by Melissa Worden
Charles Layton has written a comprehensive summary of “The Video Explosion” for the American Journalism Review. It’s a very good read.
Many newspaper Web sites think video is what readers what, which would then generate increased page views, which would then generate increased advertising opportunities. Consequently, as we know, demand for video and videographers is on the rise.
Says Layton:
The recent rush to Internet video is difficult to quantify. Lauren Hertel, who teaches at the University of Florida and does training in newsrooms and at conferences, says that many small and medium-size papers “don’t seem to think long-form videos are worth the effort.” But, she adds, this is her impression based on anecdotal evidence only. “There hasn’t been much research done on it.”
We can say with certainty, however, that many of the papers that are going for video are going for it all-out.
And that means, during this time of cutbacks, papers need to either employ more people or get photographers and reporters to multitask (and we know this type of multitasking is very challenging).
Plus, depending on what type of video you want to do, taping and editing takes A LOT of time. To do a narrative, says Chuck Fadely:
Video requires roughly 10 times more work on an assignment as [still photography] and then 100 times more work as you’re editing it. Imagine filling a 16-page special section with a hundred pictures–out of a routine city hall meeting assignment. That’s shooting video. You have to shoot every detail in the room, every angle, every expression–just to get a few seconds of video to put on top of the few seconds of audio that you’ve edited down from two hours of tape.
How do newspapers get all this done? Evelio Contreras of the Roanoke Times shares his work schedule:
It’s a time-consuming job, one that keeps Contreras at his computer from 8:30 a.m. until 10 some nights. In addition, he and several colleagues update the Web site each morning, on a rotating basis, from 4:30 to 7. “I go home, take a nap, then come back,” he says.
Certainly, narrative isn’t the only way to produce video. Says Howard Owens:
Video can take as little or as much time as you want it to take. There is no reason that you can’t shoot, edit and post a video in under 30 minutes, if not under 20 minutes (not counting commute time, talk with the editor time, gossip with a co-work time, etc.).
We’ve uncovered several different ways of using video, ranging from a 30-minute “show” such as the TimesCast to a “documentary” such as Detroit Free Press’ “Band of Brothers” to a TV clips such as CNN.com’s “Boy impaled by antler” to breaking news clips such as Washingtonpost.com/AP’s “Redskins Owner, Coach Remember Player.” (Hmmm. Which one takes the least amount of time and which one are you most likely to click on?)
So with this much work on narrative video, will there be enough return on all that investment? (Lucas Grindley came up with a formula for figuring this all out awhile ago.)
The most expensive type of ads for online videos–the so-called “pre-roll” ads that play for a few seconds before the video starts–are unpopular with viewers. Brian Haven, a senior analyst for Forrester Research, has written that 82 percent of consumers find such ads “annoying.”
Tags: video
Comments
3 Responses to “Is narrative video worth the time it takes to produce it?”
Leave a Reply
Currently reading
-
I am melissaworden on del.icio.us.
Add me to your network
I’ve said it before, any video that takes more than an hour to shoot and edit probably isn’t worth the ROI.
My boss beats me to every blog post I want to comment on these days.
Anyway: When’s the last time you saw one of these admittedly excellent pieces of journalism about online news talk to anyone from a newspaper with a circulation of, say, less than 50,000?
The reality for many smaller papers is that the sort of video the Miami Herald or Roanoke Times has the time and resources and staff to put together is completely different from what a 5,000 circ paper can — or should — do.
What do I have to do, pitch an article to CJR or AJR or OJR myself about how smaller papers are handling video? (Crap, add that to the to-do list.)
[…] I have a lot of respect for Howard Owens and the major contributions he’s making to the conversation about how newspapering is evolving, but I’m puzzle by a comment he made on a post by Melissa Worden. […]