Magazines Want To Cash In On Web Video, Too
from the it's-more-fun-with-moving-pictures dept
While newspapers flounder as they try to figure this whole internet thing out, magazines have been slightly more adept. Now, there's apparently growing interest among magazine publishers to try and cash in on the web video craze by rolling out their own video content -- but it's not driven by a desire to offer users better content, but rather simply to provide video inventory to sell to advertisers. It's almost as if these sites are assuming that because something like YouTube is popular, there's a great untapped demand among the online audience for any sort of web video, and they'll be able to capitalize on it by offering up any old content, as long as it's moving pictures. However, the rise of YouTube and other video sites simply means there's more competition for users' attention, so magazines will have to ensure that their video content is actually compelling enough to attract viewers and hold their interest. While some publications are devoting significant resources to video, others are just issuing cameras and microphones to their reporters, who often have no background in broadcast media. The assumption seems to be that video instantly makes a story more interesting, but that's not necessarily the case, particularly if it's not executed well. It's all well and good that magazines are trying to expand their online operations, but just throwing content out there solely as a vehicle with which to move ads, with little consideration of what it offers the audience, isn't a sound strategy.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
wow...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yeah, wow.
not that i am taking up for newspapers at all, the only time i read them anymore is if someone leaves the comics in the stall at work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WorkWacky.com enters the video arena too
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ew that's wrong no SO many levels!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In short, in my opinon, newspapers are more trust worthy than blugs. They have rules and code of ethics that make more of a valid source for news than some one I have never met writing their perosnal views about the world, or whatever it is that they are writing about.
Moreover, most if not all newspapers now have their contents presented on the net. So, I don't really understand what the fuss is all about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mag and Internet are two different things
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ha ha ha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mag and Internet are two different things
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quality is everything
I reckon it's about the way you tell 'em! There are loads of "record it yourself" technologies flooding the marketplace - many of them extremely effective, very clever, low cost and generating massive volumes - YouTube being a very good example. Long may it continue because all of these technologies have a massive contribution to make.
But when it comes to mag or newspaper websites, I think the rules change. In general terms, they have websites which showcase the written stuff. They'll have spent as much as they can afford in making the design and content reflect their brand. Now they're adding audio and video and it's here that good branding can turn bad.
I recently saw a Google ad for a piece of web audio technology that said "sound like the professionals in just three minutes". Erm no! Professional voiceovers, scriptwriters and producers are employed for a reason - they are professonals!. Writing for voice, recording and producing audio and video scripts, understanding marketing, brand values, what to say and even how far to stand away from the mic are all essential skills to add to the technology. If you can package the whole thing in one, even better.
Let's see how long it is before web users start to understand the difference between quality videoto really enhance a website and stuff that's just there because the mags think their visitors/readers will acept anything they put up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]