Comments on: How is Web video different?

By: Kolm peamist onlain-video formaati « Protsess

Kolm peamist onlain-video formaati « Protsess — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:14:33 +0000

[...] just ühe uue huvitava koha (lisasin ka “heade kohtade” alla), kus tuuakse välja 3 põhilist onlainile sobivaimat [...]

By: Five video story forms « Advancing the Story

Five video story forms « Advancing the Story — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:36:02 +0000

[...] trying to tell before gathering the visuals you’ll use to tell it. Our recent post on how Web video is different shared how the Washington Post categorizes Web videos into three “tiers.” At the [...]

By: FatFighterTV

FatFighterTV — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:05:20 +0000

I have recently gone from TV news health reporting to running my own website which includes videos – I am still trying different styles and lengths to see what works best, and what my viewers want to see. So far, the one thing I have learned is it definitely doesn’t have to be the standard TV news “package” format to get interest. I get just as many clicks on the videos with few, if any edits – more like a live shot type standup.

By: data

data — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:57:53 +0000

There’s a paper by Prof. Jose Van Djick on narrowcasting and user generated content wherein she describes web video as snippets. The snippet could be a grab from an aired program, or an originally-produced video on the web by a You-ser (her term). Although she focuses more on the phenomenon of narrowcasting and the user-producer experience, I think it would be good to consider her work in helping define what web video is.

By: Peter Ralph

Peter Ralph — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 14:53:45 +0000

The style of video Rhodes recommends has traditionally been favored by news directors looking to fill a 30 minute news show on a day when there is only 5 minutes of news.

It stopped working a while back. Murdoch paid a premium price for WSJ – financed by selling local TV stations at bargain basement prices.

I don’t know much about WSJ – but the Financial Times probabbly employs more foreign correspondents than all other European newspapers combined.

The FT & WSJ have niche audiences – local is not a niche. Outside the niche/tribe video struggles, it is rarely the most efficient method of imparting information.

By: Different types of web video | News Videographer

Different types of web video | News Videographer — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:07:35 +0000

[...] Potter writes this week about washingtonpost.com’s idea that web video can come in different levels of storytelling sophistication. Tier 1 – a short, single shot interview or video of a scene that stands alone. It’s typically no [...]

By: dhwenger

dhwenger — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:51:23 +0000

Thank you for your comment – this is exactly the type of discussion I’d like to start. It seems to me that there are many news organizations out there saying, “I want video on the Web and I want it to be different than what we see on TV” but not enough folks are taking the time to define what that really means.

By: Peg Achterman

Peg Achterman — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:54:43 +0000

I think we need to consider adding to Rhodes’ tiers – at least after the NYTimes piece last week that posted just prior to Election Day (Choosing a President) http://digitalartwork.net/2008/11/05/choosing-a-president/.
This piece raises the bar – as do the pieces MediaStorm regularly produces and helps distribute. They are not everyday pieces, but they are another category. I would also point to Rhodes’ own WaPost.com for a piece on Tokyo last year. It was an amazing tour and did not fall into any of these tiers.
All-to-say — the station is right – it’s changing all the time.