links for 2009-07-23

What We Learned About Online Video This Week

From YouTube to the iPlayer via newspaper sites offering moving pictures, the digital landscape for video already looks well-established.

But four years on from the moment we went from Dial-up Britain to Broadband Britain, we still have much to learn.

In my latest contribution to Journalism.co.uk I look at five lessons from the last seven days. Namely:

1. If you build it they will come…
(…provided you build something elegant and easy to use. And then market it like crazy.)
2. Don’t do video unless you’re adding value
3. You can’t control the message
4. Brands love YouTube
5. Death is a good career move online too

More on each here: Five lessons from a week in online video

Related:
What Chris Brown’s YouTube Apology Tells Us About New Media
The Independent Adds Video. Why?

links for 2009-07-22

What Chris Brown’s YouTube Apology Tells Us About New Media

“Hi, I’m Chris Brown. Since February my attorney has advised me not to speak out…”

So begins a two-minute YouTube video from the singer apologising for the vicious beating of ex-girlfriend Rihanna earlier this year.

Why has he chosen a video-sharing site, rather than a newspaper column or TV interview, to make his first public utterance on those events?

To control the message and to avoid awkward questions? If so, the plan seems to have back-fired.

One of the biggest promises of web 1.0 was disintermediation (ie) cutting out the middle man. It’s an attractive proposition for everyone, from those seeking cheaper car insurance to celebrities keen to protect or repair their reputation.

As with much else on the web the promise doesn’t necessarily match the reality. And in a web 2.0 world, a one-sided, unmediated opinion gets challenged by the crowd.

Witness the 7,793 comments (and counting) left below the video, most of them hostile, many abusive.

(Kind of) related:
The Independent Adds Video. Why?
G20, YouTube And The Three Phases of Amateur Video
Why ITV’s micropayment plan is unlikely to make the Grade

links for 2009-07-21

You Just Can’t Trust It. In Defence Of Hyperlocal, Pt 2

Continuing the series looking at the arguments made against hyperlocal. This is where we’ve got to:

  1. Hyperlocal is hyperboring  (read>>
  2. It can’t be trusted
  3. It won’t make you any money (coming soon)
  4. Nobody is doing it well (coming soon)

So let’s deal with:

2. It can’t be trusted
Lack of quality and lack of credibility are always accusations thrown at the “amateur”. But here’s the thing:

Hyperlocal is not news as we know it
Often those publishing and contributing to hyperlocal sites are not putting a story together in our conventional, media-land understanding of a story.

They are instead sharing information, gathering evidence, swapping experiences, pooling resources. Witness last weekend’s The Big Lunch as just one example. 

Will Perrin – the man behind TalkAboutLocal.org and KingsCrossEnivornment.com – comments elsewhere on this blog:

Hyperlocal content is best looked at bottom up, generated not by an abstract, detached journalist but by people on the ground who it affects. seen from that angle the trad top down issues fall away – grass roots hyperlocal content is defined by its own creation.

And yet, I think there is a role for the locally-based journalist and publisher to work hand-in-hand with the amateur, taking that raw material – and harnessing the energy and local expertise – and turning it into a water tight, double-sourced investigation. Continue reading You Just Can’t Trust It. In Defence Of Hyperlocal, Pt 2

So How Much Is Twitter’s Free Media Coverage Worth?

Advertising Age in the US has tracked down some interesting / inevitable research which has attempted to calculate the buzz around Twitter in terms of advertising and marketing spend.

And the magic figure is $48m over a 30 day month. News-monitoring service VMS based its figure on the 2.73bn impressions generated by free media. Contributions break down like this:

  • TV – 57%
  • Newspapers – 37%
  • Magazines – 5%

Apparently, CNN name-dropped Twitter more than its rival Fox News but the latter network delivered more “PR value”.

The numbers could well be conservative given there’s no allowance for smaller US newspapers and media. And, of course, there’s no notion of the global impact.

As a point of comparison, Microsoft’s marketing and PR blitz around the launch of its Bing search engine generated 63m impressions, or $573,834.

Related:
 – Guido, Jacko And Miliband’s Phantom Tweet
 – Five Ways News Organisations Should Use Twitter
 – How Twitter Left Google News Trailing Over Iran
 – Have The Young Deserted Facebook In Favour of Twitter?