I would say to you in person that the WSJ Online needs to set high standards for online video presentations just as they set high standards for their print presentations. It’s a vitally important part of preserving an iconic brand. To fail to do so is extremely dangerous in my opinion. It’s not unusual that print people don’t understand or appreciate the complexity of delivering video based content on a daily basis, to say little of knowing the basics of what makes for reasonably good video. The networks may be dinosaurs, but they KNOW how to get reasonably well produced content together on a large scale daily. They also know that it’s not an inexpensive proposition.

I would also say to you in person that if you and I are going to be participating in a world that is visually centric we must develop some visual sensibilities –one of them being a basic knowledge of what is good video and what is not. Along with that comes a certain amount of sense about what to engage in and what to pass up. Or, referring to the video in question; recognizing what is passable and what needs help. If you’d been asked to write a blog post in Spanish, you could (tossing out the option to learn Spanish in a few hours) buy a English-Spanish dictionary, visit a translation website, or hire a technical translator. There’s obviously a best choice among those three. It was THE WALL STREET JOURNAL for goodness sake. If they were coming to your house to take a picture for the article would you put on a clean shirt?

Video is a funny thing. You turn on a camera and video just “happens.” Turn on a typewriter –OOPS! I mean, fire up a word processor –nothing! No wonder more are picking up a video camera than a keyboard. Video can be a powerfully influential thing or it can be an ineffective drag on the informational message it’s trying to bear. Writing a good script is very difficult. Pushing a button is easy. People tend to like easy.

The point is, there’s a ton of marginal video out there. I’m not interested in it. I’m not interested in thousands of portals all delivering the same thing. I’m interested in great content filters and great content sources. Once again, iconic offline media entities with legendary pedigrees, need to be careful when going online. To maintain their reputations, they need to set high standards both as filters and as sources. Theirs is a tricky road.

Enough…. already. I’m sure your bored by the repetition. Sincere thanks for the thoughtful reply.

< >

“Where do you work” seems so old school, but I’m old so I won’t take offense. This year I’ve worked in New York, LA, & Atlanta, though I’m based in Cincinnati.

Currently, I own an audio post production facility (16 years at that). I’m also a post production sound mixer for film, documentaries, television, commercials, the web, etc. I’ve been helping people put the finishing touch on content for 20 years. In the early 90’s I worked the Midwest as part of a two man crew regularly serving the network news and magazine shows, NBC & ABC primarily (Nightly News, World News Tonight, Prime Time Live, Dateline, GMA, Today Show, etc.). I was lucky enough to work bits and pieces of the 1992 presidential campaign. I was helping NBC cover Dan Quayle the day after the Murphy Brown incident and was on the Perot campaign the day before he dropped out. Interesting times. News is an interesting game. So is web 2.0.

Your points are all good ones, but just as I fell into an amateur video trap, it appears that you have fallen into an amateur blogger trap — giving into the temptation to go on the attack and be REALLY obnoxious while making your points. I did that early on as a blogger and only barely recovered, because I managed to piss off a number of people who had the ability to make or break my reputation — it was hard work making amends and a hard lesson learned.

So my advice to you — if you have something negative to say about someone, ask yourself this — is this how I would talk to this person face-to-face? If not, stop, drop, roll, and take a different approach. Hiding behind a computer screen — and an anonymous about page (i.e. where do you work?) — it’s easy to get carried away.

It’s also good to ask yourself — does the blogosphere really need one more snarky blog? If not, stop, drop…etc.