I recently complained that one of the finest newspapers in the English-speaking world, despite being a leader in new technological developments, from embracing Comment is Free’s UGC element, to providing APIs, cannot sort its video offering out.
Admittedly, this all comes down to monetisation and having enough qualified staff around to do the job. But just watch this clip on the Iranian elections. The editing is so poor, you’d have to fail a high-school media student if they had the audacity to submit it. The journalism, the insight, the voiceover and the shots are all fine. We can ignore the fact that full-screen videos on the Guardian are still not available (full-screen videos on the Guardian might never be available at this rate), but this is clearly an example of ‘journalists’ having too much work on their plate. Five or six times in the clip, there are flash frames where one edit starts, and another bit finishes, just as a new part of the roughcut supplied by Reuters appears. And you can tell it’s Reuters, as I’m pretty sure the branding that comes at the start of their wires’ roughcuts flashes up for a frame or two on several occasions.
One day, I envisage a place on the web where the journalism will be as good as the production value. I guess until content is properly monetised, getting their will be quite challenging.
Related articles by Zemanta
- The future of journalism on the Web (rebeccablood.net)
- Ahmadinejad Ahead? (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
- Iran perspectives (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Guardian.co.uk: Handling reader responses in a ‘digital age’ (blogs.journalism.co.uk)