Comments on: A Print Giant Embraces the Web http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/ A blog about communications consulting in the federal government Sat, 22 Nov 2008 02:53:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Aldo Bello http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-63 Aldo Bello Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:55:27 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-63 Thank you Chris...I was not aware of these efforts...obviously. Thank you Chris…I was not aware of these efforts…obviously.

]]> By: Chris O'Leary http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-62 Chris O'Leary Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:06:03 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-62 Aldo, in response to your question on original web only programming from broadcast entities- ABC Family has greenlit a series of Internet-exclusive episodes that will serve as a prequel to its top-rated original series "Wildfire." and The Sci-Fi channel had run an animated series (from the creators of MST 3000) for online distribution only called Edward the Less ..way back in 2001. And CBS has a reality show called Inturn about young twenty-somethings going after the same job and living together. A web exclusive. Aldo, in response to your question on original web only programming from broadcast entities-
ABC Family has greenlit a series of Internet-exclusive episodes that will serve as a prequel to its top-rated original series “Wildfire.” and The Sci-Fi channel had run an animated series (from the creators of MST 3000) for online distribution only called Edward the Less ..way back in 2001. And CBS has a reality show called Inturn about young twenty-somethings going after the same job and living together. A web exclusive.

]]> By: Chris O'Leary http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-61 Chris O'Leary Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:44:30 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-61 True . I hope the videos, as short or peripheral as they may be, remain professional and the "economics" you mention do not create a dip in the standards. It could be argued they are already declining in TV itself because of their expansion to 500+ channels and the need for programming hours. But that's another discussion. Hail Web 2.0! True . I hope the videos, as short or peripheral as they may be, remain professional and the “economics” you mention do not create a dip in the standards. It could be argued they are already declining in TV itself because of their expansion to 500+ channels and the need for programming hours. But that’s another discussion. Hail Web 2.0!

]]> By: Sara Isacson http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-60 Sara Isacson Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:28:25 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-60 Good point--the essence of what Web 2.0 is really all about and where it's going...the interactive experience... Good point–the essence of what Web 2.0 is really all about and where it’s going…the interactive experience…

]]> By: Aldo Bello http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-59 Aldo Bello Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:05:03 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-59 I completely agree that video has a much more overt emotional punch and tends to be visceral, whereas print goes deeper to make you really think...generally speaking -- for TV CAN be pretty deep, as proven by the professional staffs of "Frontline" or "American Experience." It just happens to be much more time intensive to go that deep in TV, bigger staff, more people involved, more expensive. So I think that it's the economics of the medium that keep it from being deep, not the medium itself...let's not forget Murrow (and many others I could list). New Web 2.0 tools could change this, as they give viewers the chance to ask additional questions, clarify, join the conversation and generally participate in a deeper way with the story. It's possible that short, professionally-produced videos could be used as emotional catalysts that unleash a much deeper understanding of the topic...given the right tools and the right topic, communities could aid in this process and video on the Web would only be a part of the experience. I completely agree that video has a much more overt emotional punch and tends to be visceral, whereas print goes deeper to make you really think…generally speaking — for TV CAN be pretty deep, as proven by the professional staffs of “Frontline” or “American Experience.” It just happens to be much more time intensive to go that deep in TV, bigger staff, more people involved, more expensive. So I think that it’s the economics of the medium that keep it from being deep, not the medium itself…let’s not forget Murrow (and many others I could list).

New Web 2.0 tools could change this, as they give viewers the chance to ask additional questions, clarify, join the conversation and generally participate in a deeper way with the story. It’s possible that short, professionally-produced videos could be used as emotional catalysts that unleash a much deeper understanding of the topic…given the right tools and the right topic, communities could aid in this process and video on the Web would only be a part of the experience.

]]> By: Sara Isacson http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-57 Sara Isacson Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:55:11 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-57 That's definitely one of the trickiest things about video--esp. news video....footage is kind of inherently biased (even BEFORE it's edited to portray a particular POV)...Reading a straight newspaper story about an IED going off in Iraq and killing a dozen civilians is a whole lot different than seeing footage of it on the news. You're absolutely right Chris, they are completely different ways of telling a story--newspaper & web articles give audience members far more opportunities to make up their own minds about things--even if a publication has a particular slant, articles generally provide a decent set of facts and background info. But news video is all about capturing a particular moment--all about making an impact--any background info in the narration is secondary. That’s definitely one of the trickiest things about video–esp. news video….footage is kind of inherently biased (even BEFORE it’s edited to portray a particular POV)…Reading a straight newspaper story about an IED going off in Iraq and killing a dozen civilians is a whole lot different than seeing footage of it on the news.

You’re absolutely right Chris, they are completely different ways of telling a story–newspaper & web articles give audience members far more opportunities to make up their own minds about things–even if a publication has a particular slant, articles generally provide a decent set of facts and background info. But news video is all about capturing a particular moment–all about making an impact–any background info in the narration is secondary.

]]> By: Chris O'Leary http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-50 Chris O'Leary Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:51:31 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-50 Wish I had a good Bowie ‘change’ quote to lead in but can't pull it up right now. I agree, Sara that some broadcast or cable entities have seen the light. Many use the web to expand their programs or hook viewers into the pod feeds-some for a fee. As video becomes more standardized through more robust compression tools and protocols, we’ll obviously see even more video on-line along with the additional blogs, interactive features etc.. I do wonder though about those newspaper companies that have so long been rooted in a craft like journalism where the written word and storytelling are the foundation for their fan base. Expanding the written word from paper to the web seems but a tactile difference to some. Let’s face it, they write on computers and transfer it to analog print if you will. So the craft is in tact. But moving the author’s sensibilities of the English language into a video format on the web with narration and images that leave little for the imagination, does this alter the source’s core building blocks? Are we now watching, not reading, with a prejudice of a “60 Minutes”, “Fox at Five”, or another video format that has been imbedded in our psyche from the bombardment that TV tends to lend itself to. Is that good or bad? Not saying…can’t. Wish I had a good Bowie ‘change’ quote to lead in but can’t pull it up right now. I agree, Sara that some broadcast or cable entities have seen the light. Many use the web to expand their programs or hook viewers into the pod feeds-some for a fee. As video becomes more standardized through more robust compression tools and protocols, we’ll obviously see even more video on-line along with the additional blogs, interactive features etc.. I do wonder though about those newspaper companies that have so long been rooted in a craft like journalism where the written word and storytelling are the foundation for their fan base. Expanding the written word from paper to the web seems but a tactile difference to some. Let’s face it, they write on computers and transfer it to analog print if you will. So the craft is in tact. But moving the author’s sensibilities of the English language
into a video format on the web with narration and images that leave little for the imagination, does this alter the source’s core building blocks? Are we now watching, not reading, with a prejudice of a “60 Minutes”, “Fox at Five”, or another video format that has been imbedded in our psyche from the bombardment that TV tends to lend itself to. Is that good or bad? Not saying…can’t.

]]> By: Aldo Bello http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-48 Aldo Bello Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:36:26 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-48 Great to know about the "Today Show" Sara...I'll have to check it out. Is anyone aware of any professionally-produced programming, originating from a television entity, that has been produced for Web only viewing? Great to know about the “Today Show” Sara…I’ll have to check it out.

Is anyone aware of any professionally-produced programming, originating from a television entity, that has been produced for Web only viewing?

]]> By: sara isacson http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-47 sara isacson Tue, 06 Mar 2007 21:00:49 +0000 http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2007/03/06/a-print-giant-embraces-the-web/#comment-47 So true, Aldo. The relationship between the Post’s online and print divisions has been pretty interesting to watch. They’ve always operated--both formally and informally--as such separate entities. In many ways, they’ve actually been each other’s fiercest market competitors. Good to see that they’re integrating efforts… USA Today is also trying to get innovative with it’s online presence. A few days ago they launched an entirely revamped Website—all based on building an online community (almost like a social network). Per its Editor: “Our Website has a new look. But the real change is in the approach, not the appearance. While we’ve refined the design, we’ve also expanded the journalistic mission: Our ambition is to help readers quickly and easily make sense of the world around them by giving them a wider view of the news of the day and connecting them with other readers who can contribute to their understanding of events.” (read the whole article at: www.usatoday.com/news/2007-03-02-editors-note_N.htm) Also, while I completely agree with your thoughts on opportunities lost by the television industry’s lack of willingness (or foresight) to embrace the Web, some individual TV programs ARE embracing it whole-heartedly. In fact, just this week, the “Today Show” launched a new homepage at www.todayshow.com. The new domain builds on the show’s content by including a video blog from Al Roker, an Ann Curry page, performances from the show’s concert series and more… But my favorite example a TV show using the Web is the Sci Fi Channel's “Battlestar Gallactica” site, which along with standards like blogs, podcasts and “make your own episode” promotions, actually created a subseries of online-only Webisodes to keep the storyline going and keep viewers engaged during the show’s offseason. The site also posts extra “not-broadcast” scenes after show airing. Check it out at www.scifi.com/battlestar . The times they are a' changin'... So true, Aldo. The relationship between the Post’s online and print divisions has been pretty interesting to watch. They’ve always operated–both formally and informally–as such separate entities. In many ways, they’ve actually been each other’s fiercest market competitors. Good to see that they’re integrating efforts…

USA Today is also trying to get innovative with it’s online presence. A few days ago they launched an entirely revamped Website—all based on building an online community (almost like a social network). Per its Editor:

“Our Website has a new look. But the real change is in the approach, not the appearance.

While we’ve refined the design, we’ve also expanded the journalistic mission: Our ambition is to help readers quickly and easily make sense of the world around them by giving them a wider view of the news of the day and connecting them with other readers who can contribute to their understanding of events.”
(read the whole article at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/2007-03-02-editors-note_N.htm)

Also, while I completely agree with your thoughts on opportunities lost by the television industry’s lack of willingness (or foresight) to embrace the Web, some individual TV programs ARE embracing it whole-heartedly. In fact, just this week, the “Today Show” launched a new homepage at http://www.todayshow.com. The new domain builds on the show’s content by including a video blog from Al Roker, an Ann Curry page, performances from the show’s concert series and more…

But my favorite example a TV show using the Web is the Sci Fi Channel’s “Battlestar Gallactica” site, which along with standards like blogs, podcasts and “make your own episode” promotions, actually created a subseries of online-only Webisodes to keep the storyline going and keep viewers engaged during the show’s offseason. The site also posts extra “not-broadcast” scenes after show airing. Check it out at http://www.scifi.com/battlestar .

The times they are a’ changin’…

]]>