Video isn't working. That's what many publishers have come to realize, according to a September article in the Columbia Journalism Review, written by Heidi N. Moore. Ever since first reading the article I wanted to post some of my thoughts here, and am now finally getting around to it. But first, if you're interested in journalism and/or video, please go read the article. It's very well-written and worth your time.
Before diving into my thoughts on the article, I want to point out that I will be approaching this from the perspective of a video producer. I'm a storyteller, but not a journalist. I'll leave it to the journalists to discuss their own experiences (and please do). But speaking as a video production professional, I agree with Moore's observations. Allow me to highlight four of her points, along with my commentary, and some takeaways.
Video is Expensive
Publishers have laid off writers and turned to video, thinking that somehow they'll save money in the process, while driving up their readership and revenue. But it costs a lot of money to produce unique, quality video. Even in 2017 I still have to educate others about the costs of video and why it's so expensive. I don't know what the root cause is for the misconception (perhaps it's the democratization of the equipment and the low barrier to entry), but it's a misconception that has led many people to believe that incredible video can be produced cheaply. Click here to read more about video production misconceptions.
Consider this quote from the article:
Takeaway: Just like any professional in any industry, an experienced, reputable video production company will charge the going market rate for services. Don't expect quality production work to be done cheaply, or for free. We don't ask that of any other businesses, as the following video points out:
Video is an Investment
Today, more and more brands are taking their work in-house, opting for their own marketing departments and video production teams, instead of working with a traditional agency. And, as Moore points out, media publishers have also. They've decided to get rid of their writing staff in favor of video. But here's the main problem for publishers, and the main lesson for those brands who want to do everything in-house: You have to invest in video and give your team all the resources they need to produce good work. Moore emphasizes "low-quality video production and weak technological support for video content" as two of her four reasons why the pivot to video has failed.
As Moore writes, "Many publishers’ pivots to video are ill-considered, and thus they have deployed minimal investment in resources, studio space, equipment, or salaries. This won’t help video grow."
Takeaway: If you're going to do it, do it right. If you currently have an in-house video production team, or are making that transition, give them the very best tools to do the job. Don't expect them to produce masterful videos with one hand tied behind their backs.
Video Requires Planning
Clients and internal partners like the idea of video, but many times they don't have a clearly defined strategy for video. The notion of "let's just go out and capture it and then figure out what to do with the footage later," is not a well-defined video strategy for reaching your marketing goals. Video is more than grabbing a camera, running out to the location, and pressing Record. Consider Moore's observation, "The biggest problem with the pivot to video is that it’s not well-considered strategy. Instead, it’s been born of desperation."
Of course Moore is talking specifically about media publishers, but the same can be said for many businesses who are using video. Considerations must be made when diving into video. One size doesn't fit all.
Video Should Be Good
If all of the above considerations are made, then your video will be good. But if you rush into video without the right plan, the right tools, or the right investment, you will be left with video that just, frankly, isn't very good, as Moore writes, "Publishers who pivoted to video have forfeited the majority of their hard-won native audiences in only a year of churning out undifferentiated, bland chunks of largely aggregated 'snackable' video. That’s no one’s idea of success." Differentiation comes when the proper value is placed on the process itself.
There's a place for video. People still want video. Moore isn't suggesting that publishers abandon video, but rather incorporate video into a, "balanced multimedia approach...that includes well-written, well-reported stories, strong data and graphics, and good art."