Ngecha Artist Association Video

About a month ago I edited together a video for the Ngecha Artist Association talking about their work in Kenya.  The video was taken by Erin Murphy on her digital still camera while she was working on her graduate studies in Kenya.  I think it’s a great example of how you can tell a great story without expensive equipment (though a microphone would have been nice.  I had to subtitle over the speaking parts because they were too hard to hear).

Here Comes Another Bubble…

Another video that came out a while ago, but is worth watching again.  Whenever I take a step back from my work from YongoPal, I think of this video.  The economic crash seems to have curbed the web 2.0 bubble due to the pull-back of venture capital, but I wonder if it has fully burst yet.

MacBook Wheel

I know this came out about a year ago, but it still never gets old to me.  Well done, The Onion.  Well done.

Video Snacking and Web Shows – Defining a show, and why it doesn’t really matter

In an article about the most watched show on the internet, Tod Sacerdoti from Video Insider defines a show as “any periodically produced branded content.”  I would expand on this, defining a show as “any periodically produced branded content containing related themes or plot lines.”  To me, the most important aspect of a “show” is a consistent theme or plot line.

Traditionally, TV shows have been either 30 minutes or 60 minutes long when you include commercials.  There isn’t something magical about this length of time – it just made sense for conventional reasons.  We are used to judging time by an hour, so it made sense to create shows that were 30 or 60 minutes in length.  Now that video is moving online, we are seeing this constraints go away, which is allowing video to evolve.  Shows now don’t have to be a set time – they can be as long or short as necessary to tell a story.  Sometime this means a short 90 second “video snack,” while other times it could mean a longer series like the Dr. Horrible Sing-a-Long Blog.  People like to define how long thing should or shouldn’t be, but I think the internet allows enough flexibility to break out of these traditional molds.

There are certainly advantages to this.  We no longer have to shove in filler plots to tell our stories.  Shows get be the right length to be effective and not drag or contain unnecessary content.  This is a positive thing for storytelling.

I’m not exactly sure whether or not it is important to differentiate web video by whether it is a show or not.  What I like about the growth of the internet is the fact that we can break out of traditional definitions and let things grow more organically.  Traditional standards like viewership and ratings are harder to measure and say less about the success of videos now than they used to.  In fact, videos targeting niches will receive less views, but might be more effecting in maintaining a viewership.  Rather than put things into tight, restrictive categories, I think it’s important to just let it go.  Make videos people will enjoy, and don’t focus on the numbers.  It’s more fun that way, anyways.

Slate V – The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Aspects of Slate’s Video Site

This week in my Web Strategies for Storytelling class, we are looking at how print-focused websites are implementing video.  A couple years ago, my favorite online magazine – Slate.com – launched Slate V, a video focused piece of their website.  I was initially very excited about the site, but honestly haven’t paid much attention to it lately, which may or may not say something abut the site.

Slate.com consists primarily of political commentary, with a few lifestyle articles mixed in.  What I like most about their magazine is the smart, non-mainstream commentary they use in their writing.  This same commentary is also applied to their videos.  While some videos are serious clips, most of them are humorous.  For example, this video pokes fun at the failing print media business:

The videos all have an amateur feel to them, which I think is a plus.  The user interface of the site is also pleasant.  It is easy to click through videos and fairly easy to share video (although the code is fairly hefty).  The videos are embedded using Brightcove, probably so they can put ads at the beginning of the videos.  I find this fairly annoying and actually am deterred a bit from using the site.  Even worse, while an ad is playing at the beginning, I am unable to click through other videos.  An ad for Red Robin blocks the other videos.

Slate V might want to reconsider how it displays ads.  I don’t mind sitting through a short ad if I’m watching a TV show, but I don’t want to when I’m watching a 2 minutes video clip.  What is even worse is the blocking of other videos.  This really detracts from the site.

So to break Slate’s video site down:

The Good

• Funny, clever content
• Short videos that keep my attention
• Amateur style
• Easy to redistribute

The Bad

• Ads at the beginning of the videos
• Use of Brightcove instead of something more standard like YouTube to embed (note: Slate V has a YouTube channel with these videos as well, but they don’t experience very high traffic.  They would receive much more traffic if they used YouTube.)

The Ugly

• Ads blocking other videos while an ad is playing over the video.  I think this is a pretty big deal and really needs to be changed.

In the end, I’m still a big Slate V fan due to the high quality of content.  If they fixed their overwhelming ads and changed their primary video distribution model to a YouTube based one, I think their site would move from a B+ to an A.

To conclude, here is another great Slate V video poking fun at Twitter (This time embedded through their YouTube channel rather than their native Brightcove).

Microsoft Soapbox – Too Little, Too Late

Well, it looks like the war is over.  Microsoft is conceding to YouTube by scaling back on their video service Soapbox.

Wait, Microsoft has a video service?  Apparently they do.

For some reason, Microsoft likes to try to make an application to compete in every market.  When it comes to online video, this really doesn’t make sense.

In economics, the network effect refers to the “effect that one user of a good or service has on the value of that product to other people” (Wikipedia).  Video sites like YouTube are an example of a positive network effect.  The more people that use the site, the more valuable the site becomes.

Because YouTube absolutely dominates other video services in number of users (it is currently the number 4 visited site on the internet according to Alexa), the value of a video posted on YouTube is higher than that of one posted on another video site such as Blip.tv or Vimeo.  Even though these services provide higher quality video compression and embeds, it is hard to beat the reach you can achieve with YouTube.

So what are the implications of YouTube’s dominance of online video?  When it comes to storytelling online, there are a few.  Primarily, when making a video for the web, it is best to have YouTube’s standards in mind.  This means 10 minutes in length maximum and the compression that YouTube recommends at the time.  Because YouTube has finally gone widescreen, storytellers can more freely shoot in 16×9.  Until about 6 months ago, this wasn’t the case.

Moreover, storytellers online need to take the YouTube community and culture into account if they wish to reach a broad audience.  Short videos are preffered for most, and something that catches attention early is necessary.  What might work well in a more traditional television or DVD setting might fail on YouTube.  Because of YouTube’s large market share, storytellers are constrained by their policies and culture moreso than other video services.

While I may not like the fact that I am constrained by YouTube’s policies and culture when I create online video, I do think it is wise for Microsoft to pull back their video service.  With something as powerful and wide-reaching as YouTube, we really don’t need another video service.  Services like Vimeo and Blip.tv are great providers for niche users, but Microsoft clearly isn’t a niche-chasing company.

Very few people have every heard of Soapbox.  With the immense amount of value coming out of YouTube, that really isn’t a bad thing.

Some Great Old Political Ads

John Dickerson of Slate V made a short video highlighting some political advertisements of the past.  Looking back on the ads reminds us that the dirty tactics of today are quite similar to the dirty tactics of yesterday.