video journalism

I've always been suspicious of anything resembling television journalism. Call it my prejudice, but I don't think many TV anchors are using their powers to propagate meaningful journalism. Rather they show us bowling matches, dog shows and little kids at camp. (Really, it's not the dog shows. It's more like the too-tan news anchor with teeth shinier than bicycle reflectors.) So, I've always preferred writing and even radio over television. But video journalism became a reality for journalists in newsrooms, it became apparent to me that if, indeed, I want to live my life as an underpaid lackey for a news organization, I would have to understand and even succumb to video journalism.

That was about two years ago. A lot has changed since then.

Video journalism, as the newspaper people do it, provides content narrated in a sensible way. The videos are often short and cover the background. Reporters for the NYTimes know this best. They have reporter Jeffrey Gettleman show us Somalia in two weeks. Instead of reading his (often excellent) descriptions of conditions, Gettleman can actually show us what he is seeing. This is good in quite a few ways. First, it gives us something akin to a primary document and breaks down the barriers between the reader, viewer and listener and the information. Second, it builds trust between the reporter and the reader. This trust is especially crucial at this time when newspapers are seen as merely branches of a corporation. Third, it better illustrates the reporter's point. Just watch A.O. Scott's brilliant movie reviews. Interspersed with his image (Scott cultivates a slightly pompous persona with his nose up in the air and his monotone voice. I'm sorry, did I say 'slightly'?) are clips of the actual movie. You can get a sneak peak of the film as well as hear Scott's often amusing reviews.

The New York Times does it well because it does not merely shovel the new of its television partner (not that it has one) on the web. The Chicago Tribune could have a much better video site if they had reporters create their own mini-documentaries. That takes resources, however, and the reality is, we work in an industry with scant resources. The Tribune's multimedia page, however, is top notch. Its photo essays are often moving and interesting. I am also reminded of the Washington Post's powerful multimedia essay titled "Being a Black Man." This work was among the most interesting and thought-provoking I've seen on the web. Besides fascinating content, the essay is also visually appealing and well scripted.

Part of me wonders if we're catering to that 'consumer' friendly paradigm by providing video with our news stories. Whatever happened to imagination? But a larger, less sentimental portion of me believes that as things in this world grow increasingly uncertain, readers, viewers and listeners want more proof. Proof they will get with video journalism.