[Lansing, Mich.: A video in the recently adopted new player]
In a spot-check today, I found that most if not all Gannett websites are now using Brightcove software to publish and distribute videos. This is at least the third so-called video platform that the company has adopted since I began tracking its use.More than two years ago, I wrote about a deal Gannett had just signed with a Seattle company called thePlatform, which was to be the new vendor at the time. More recently, Chief Digital Officer Chris Saridakis said all sites would complete the rollout by the end of last month.
The push appears to be part of a broader plan to revamp Gannett's websites again. "In 2010," Saridakis (left) told a Wall Street conference last month, "we will be embarking on a major redesign of our sites that will redefine what a local news site is and drive innovation for both our users and advertisers."The Brightcove switch was announced in October, according to this memo published by Gannettoid. Why the change? Saridakis said it would offer "increased monetization capabilities, a better user experience and a more streamlined process for our publishers. As industry experts predict video to be the fastest growing format over the next several years, we are positioned to capture that growth across all of our properties."
We've been hearing about video as the next best thing in story-telling and ad-revenue growth for more than two years now. But I haven't seen much evidence of that on any newspaper websites that I visit -- in and out of Gannett. Is the technology stuck in neutral, or are advertisers simply unwilling to spend enough to justify labor-intensive video production?
Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.
[Video: that's from Gannett's Lansing State Journal]
Why the switch to Brightcove? Simple. The previous platform used by Gannett sites, Maven, has been shuttered: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10275960-2.html
ReplyDeleteMaven was a piece of junk. Slow and clunky.
ReplyDeleteAs for Jim's question, video production in the newspaper newsroom hasn't integrated itself well. Photogs train as videographers, but the production process for video takes too long, and they don't have the skills down yet or a streamlined workflow to be able produce at near the level of a broadcast photog/video editor. Editing takes a photog a long time away from their shooter job. For the most part, producing video gets in the way of daily priorities.
As a photographer at a northwest newspaper I agree with 2:30. Management gave us video cameras with little or no training and expect it to be part of our jobs. Management at our site expects us to shoot both video and still at the same assignment. One is bound to be sacrificed for the other, and in many cases both still and video from those assignments are poor.
ReplyDeleteAt our shop, the reporters are using their personally bought-and-paid-for phones to shoot video and take photos for the Web. We haven't had any video training and very little "how to take photos" training. But we get it done. Far too many people are worried about "doing it properly" and thus remain paralyzed.
ReplyDeleteI look at the way that Gannett tries to cram the round-shaped peg of Brightcove's video platform into the polygonal-shaped hole that represents the mandates of the company, and I get sad.
ReplyDeleteVideo delivery is not rocket science that needs to be outsourced. The company's first platform, cooked up in-house, was crap. That doesn't mean that the company can't ever design a great video delivery platform in-house. I really wish they would.
The fact that big media companies like Gannett routinely turn to outside solutions for Internet or computer expertise suggests to me that the company doesn't want to imagine how capable it could be developing its own solutions.
Saxotech? Acquired, expensively. (Because designing a web-based content management system is hard.) Atex Prestige? Licensed, expensively. (Because integrating a content management system with version history into a text editor is strange voodoo.) Online pdf editions? Hosted at someplace that's not gannett.com. (Because keeping track of who subscribes, and providing a link to a PDF download, is not something newspapers are supposed to be good at?) The portable device of the future that most people will read content on? Probably made by Apple or Amazon.
I wish management would imagine more when it comes to technology.
@2:30 Maven was junk, but Brightcove is different junk. Neither of them are ideal.
I agree that there is a diminished expectation for quality when asking someone to do so many jobs.
It never seems to amaze me that Gannett wastes tons of money on crap. There are some free open-source alternatives like Flowplayer that can stream video and it also has a commercial componet to stream ads at the beginning, middle and end. Also can do overlays. Not rocket science but takes some technical expertise. Oh wait, they keep getting rid of people that know what they are going.
ReplyDeleteTwo years ago we were told video was the rage. Now at our shop we're cutting waaaaay back. why? because we don't have enough people to shoot video, or do it right, and we don't have enough of the right equipment to do it right, and when we do post videos hardly anyone looks at them. This company has made SO many stupid mistakes, like HighSchoolSports.net, that it wouldn't surprise me if Brightcove turns out to be one more piece of junk platform/program.
ReplyDeleteReporters were all trained to shoot video at our publication, but it took too much time to edit the videos. After a while, many of them got tired of having to wear so many hats while being told they might be laid off, so they left for stable jobs. Gannett has needed someone for a long time who can improve their terrible sites. They are such an embarrassment when compared to other major newspaper sites.
ReplyDelete"I agree that there is a diminished expectation for quality when asking someone to do so many jobs"
ReplyDeleteYou also need qualified video editors and photo editors. At TJN in Westchester County NY there is no one that can lead them to produce quality video, many layers of incompetence in photo and video management.
After over $10,000 in equipment and training was invested two years ago, total local video advertising output here has now surpassed the amazing level of SIX advertisers, with revenues reaching the MID-FOUR FIGURES!!!!
ReplyDeleteBrightcove is a significant upgrade from Maven, which was junky, clunky and posed constant technical problems. Brightcove is much more user-friendly and gives a cleaner look to all videos. So far, I like it.
ReplyDeleteAs many previous posters have commented, the lack of training is problematic. We have had multiple training sessions with a former photo editor who is now in charge of video projects. While he is a good teacher who has been patient with us, since many of us are not visually-oriented, I believe that the best "training" comes from practice -- shooting and editing videos on a regular basis.
As with many other Gannett sites, the problem at mine is that there is not enough time to commit to doing video work on a regular basis. The bulk of that responsibility has been thrust on the already-overworked reporters. Some are better at making time for it than others, and since everyone has about the same amount of training, we have team players who will step up and edit if the reporter has to write the print story for deadline.
I don't mind doing videos if I have the time, but it's a pain in the ass to try to shoot, get info for a print story, come back, try to edit or help edit and write a print story, not to mention give constant updates for the Web site.
The thing that really bothers me is that I have heard so many editors at my paper say "it doesn't matter, just get it up" when it comes to video. Someone tell me again why I should bust my ass if the quality doesn't matter.
If there is indeed a push for more video content in the near future (trying to capitalize on growth potential) it will be yet another example of the way Gannett likes to chase its tale. Several years ago, my site spent a good deal of time and money training a whole host of people to shoot and edit video. Then, it almost entirely abandoned the concept. Now, we probably have only one part-time and one full-time employee who can edit video in a pinch.
ReplyDeleteIf there's a new push, everyone will need to be retrained. That is, of course, the way Gannett leadership likes to do things. If its efficient it has no place in a Gannett workplace.
Plus, the retraining would be much easier if we were using a basic video editing program instead of Avid, a complex piece of software that's great for making movies and TV quality pieces but way too expensive and complicated for the types of things that newspapers are posting to Web sites. I wonder how many jobs we might have saved if the company had purchased basic video editiing programs for its newspapers as opposed to multiple copies of Avid.