In the past five years, the Times, the Journal, the Post, POLITICO and others have dedicated more resources to video than to any other new endeavor, and, to date, have lost money in every case, sources at those organizations said. Creating compelling television, it turned out, meant more than putting talking heads around a table. It required millions of dollars, new innovations, and, most important, experienced producers and compelling on-air talent.
Now, the hope for live digital television is all but dead, and the entire industry is on a “course correction.” The focus has shifted from live programming to brief video packages requiring minimal cost and production efforts. Even here, news organizations have struggled to turn video into a lucrative business, let alone a robust revenue generator. In 2013, the Times couldn’t even draw enough viewers to deliver on its advertisement deals.
FJP: Let’s bring lack of imagination into this equation.
Just as early radio emulated print, and early TV emulated radio, early Web-based video is emulating contemporary TV.
When there are global events such as the recent Ukrainian uprising, hundreds of thousand tuned into Epreso TV. Same same when we watched Tahrir Square via Al Jazeera.
This doesn’t happen often though so consider what the Web delivery system actually is: text, graphics, video, words, interaction. It’s not TV and shouldn’t try to be.
Your successful video is created within that context, and within that delivery mechanism. Think through your medium and program accordingly. — Michael