Mike Jones Digital Basin
cinematic media rinse cycle

the Video-Journalist and the restoration of a profession

There's no denying its a time of enormous change for all sectors of the media industry - both technological and cultural - invariably one driven by the other. For many of these changes it's easy to play agnostic fence sitter and simply say they are natural evolution of form that is inevitable - neither good nor bad, just change. Many people, my self included, very often get excited by change almost just because its different. Different keeps things interesting, not necessarily better, but always interesting. But there are other shifts in process, technology, perception or culture that I come across that go beyond being natural evolution and become much more imperative; much more important.



This brief article, entitled 'New Media Clashes With Old', touches on a discussion/debate that took place at NAB07 where more forward thinking TV news, current affairs and broadcast content producers were extolling the virtues of the Video-Journalist; the independent news gather, reporter, camera op and editor. The self contained on-man band Journalist.

Obviously from the network's perspective this is labour saving, cost effective, low maintenance way to gather content, so obviously they like they idea. However a great many old-salt camera ops, editors, reporters and producers hold great concerns about quality of such simplified production process.

My perspective is simple... Quality is simply Not the issue and should be no part of this discussion on any tangible level. There is more than enough atrocious creative, technical and cultural quality happening in traditional broadcast journalism as it stands! To suggest that the move to the Video-Journalist model as mainstream reportage lowers the quality further or, more absurd, to assert that the profession of Video-Journalist cannot grow into the utmost technical and creative quality, is just arrogant ignorance.

For the networks and broadcasters the main benefit is economic but for the profession and the viewers the benefits are infinitely more profound. As the article points out, lower costs mean VJ's are more free to explore stories that would otherwise not be explored, or follow leads without a guaranteed end. Both scenarios move Journalism and News back to the open view of society it was always intended to be at its most noble level. Agendas are far less able to be overtly served by the network when there isn't significant cost involved in covering a story. that cost of coverage is a direct form of censorship. Moreover the VJ model does away with the personality driven 'reporter' who is more show pony actor that journalist. The focus is back on the story, the content not the face. The VJ model dispenses with the cumbersome invasiveness of the news crew, the celebrity appeal of the news reporting vehicle itself where an event doesn't 'really happen' until there is a make shift car park full of OB vans and where that Network presence is more important than the story or the event.

The mainstream network move to this model is not just a natural evolution - it is a crucial turning point to restore the profession to one of integrity, craft, skill and content.

Here's a number of links that look at the Video-Journalist and the impact on broadcasting.

Democratising the Tv
Inevitable revolution or way to cut TV jobs?
In defence of Video Journalists
Current TV

Posted at 01:00AM Apr 21, 2007 by Mike Jones in general  |  Comments[1]