Michael Rosenblum is een goeroe binnen de videojournalistiek. Met zijn bedrijf Rosenblum TV was hij verantwoordelijk voor de transitie naar een ‘VJ-driven’ nieuwsorganisatie bij de New York Times, de BBC en diverse andere omroepen. Op 5 maart spreekt hij op het congres Digital News Affairs (DNA2009) in Brussel (waarvoor bezoekers van RethinkingMedia korting kunnen krijgen). Tijdens DNA2009 gaat Rosenblum uitleggen hoe de nieuwste hard- en software het voor journalisten mogelijk maken eenvoudig de stap naar video-verslaggeving te maken.
Speciaal voor RethinkingMedia beantwoordt Michael Rosenblum in een videoboodschap vragen van onze bezoekers en leden van Dutch Media Professionals. Wil je niet wachten tot 5 maart of kun je er niet bij zijn? Stel hieronder je vragen aan Michael Rosemblum.
Vragen kun je in de reactievelden stellen, het liefst in het Engels. Over een aantal weken plaatsen wij de videoreactie van Rosemblum hier op RethinkingMedia (vul bij de reactie je mailadres in en we houden je nog op de hoogte ook ; )).
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Michael, of course it's good that people don't need three piece teams anymore todo tv or videoreporting, but for the rest: what's new about vj's? We need new forms, new ways of journalism, real innovation instead of cheaper operations to make the sort of items! Where do you see real innovation and can you give examples of that?
Ofcourse i meant to say 'real innovation instead of cheaper operations to make the same sort of items we already know from tv'.
Do you agree that the lack of easy but powerful video editing software is a major hurdle for the large-scale use of (semi-) professional video? iMovie and Windows Movie Maker are limited and/or Quirky, then there's nothing, then there are professional applications with manuals of over a 1000 pages. But look at a lightweight (but fiercely powerful) screencasting application such as Screenflow: it's plug and play, drag and drop, intuitive, no rendering required, sleek & sexy. Screenflow proves it can be done, but why isn't there any regular video editing solution out there, and are you as puzzled by the lack of it as I am?
Hardware question: what's your solution for handheld recording? I love Flips and Zi6's as the next guy, but the lack of any external mic is a bummer. What's your favorite pocket sized HD camcorder?
In your experience, what is the biggest hurlde for established media brands to change the way in which they operate? Do you have any suggestions for how they can ease the transition?
I’ve got the feeling traditional media companies tend to produce online video items that look like TV items. Nicely edited, leaders, bumpers, voice overs, fancy music and stuff. This makes the production much more expensive and the time to publish longer. Do you agree that the Internet – and in particular online media users – don’t require such highly produced video items? (Non edited 1.5 minute items recorded with The Flip will do)
Dear Erwin
I think that the new technologies give us a chance to do more than simply cut the cost of production. I think we have an opportunity now to create a new grammar for video journalism. Just as the invention of small hand-held Leicas created a revolution in photo journalism some 70 years ago, leading to Magnum and photo journalism as an art in its own right, so now I think that these small digital video cameras can do for us what Leicas did for photographers in the 1930s- that is, lead to a grammar of video that is more personal, more intimate and far more powerful. But it means a basic change in how we think about and use the gear.
Hey Jaap
Yes, I agree that the market is ripe for an extremely simple online edit system. some time ago, I saw one in a Japanese camera, in Japan. There was a very simple drag and drop software built into the view screen. You used your finger to move around frames of video. Why this never caught on I don't understand. As for simple cameras, once Mino puts some decent audio inputs into the HD flipcam, I think we'll really have something
Hi Tom
The biggest hurdle for established media companies is psychological. They simply cannot imagine making so fundamental a change in the way that they work. When I first presented my concept to the BBC, a long time ago, I was asked by the Board of Governors (all old and established), "When do you believe this change will happen"? So I told them "when all of you are dead, because you are the ones who will hold it back". Luckily for me, (and them) we didn't have to wait that long. They essentially got out of the way. Most major media companies are run by people who grew up and worked in an analog/broadcast world. Try as they might, they just cannot wrap their heads around the world of online/digital. A 23-year old working in the company can. It's the only world they really think about. They barely watch or consider conventional TV. When that 23 year old is running the company, as they will some day, the business will be driven by online/digital/nonlinear thinking. Of course, by then, the 23 year olds of that time will be into something completely different and say "oh man.. that old web shit again! It's over!"
Dear Jeroen
The web itself is a platform – a very powerful one, for both transmission but also dialogue. I think as a culture we are globally moving to a place we might call Screenworld, where more and more content is being delivered as video. This is a very plastic medium, like print. In the earliest days of the print revolution, post Gutenberg, the only way people thought of text was as Bible. That was all they knew. But over time, a whole spectrum of text based communcation arose and evolved, Even 2 this day. The same will be true of video. It is going to mature and fill a very wide range of uses, from TV type stories to a kind of Vmail.