An Underlying Problem with Podcast and Video Content
Much has been made recently on the evacuation of print media departments at certain major media outlets in lieu of video production staff. Consider “print media” as actual ink on paper, or words delivered via an online platform. Recently MTV raised a stink within the media community when they laid off a dozen or so writers in their news department, with the intent to replace them with people specialized in producing video and short-form content. Fox Sports made a similar move in late June, laying off their digital writing and editing team to hire more video production staff and emphasize their on-air personalities.
This impulse towards video and the discontinuation of print is in no way a new phenomenon in media. Media consultants have been pushing this idea of engaging with audiences via video for years. The effectiveness of moving content generation from print to video is arguable at best, with multiple outlets making the move eventually folding, though many were already facing desperate situations in the first place, initiating the format change. Others decide to revert back to a more balanced media approach after going hard into the video realm. Still others have thrived in the video environment. No matter what the medium, quality and engaging content tends to win out regardless of the format, and ultimately it is probably up to the outlet and media members to find the medium that best fits the subject matter, and what most appeals to their audience.
Individuals in the print media industry love to tout the value of print whenever news emerges about layoffs in the industry similar to the recent moves at MTV and Fox Sports. Certainly there is still incredible value in print, even in 2017. The theater of the mind that print media can stimulate, the long-form possibilities and in-depth analysis that print can deliver—and short-form video fails at—are just some of the valid arguments for outlets to include at least some print media in their ecosystem. But the truth is there is a large segment of the population that probably would rather have their news and human interest stories delivered to them in video form.
At the same time print media is being fazed down in many sectors of media, podcasting in the sports and entertainment realm is booming, and becoming an incredibly-important economic driver in the marketplace. Appearances on high-profile podcasts such as Joe Rogan’s “The Joe Rogan Experience” have been cited by music artists across genres for one of the reasons their careers took off, despite a lack of support from traditional mainstream media.
Podcasts that focus on discussing television series and movies, as well as sports commentary and even politics and human interest are replacing some or much of the old column-style media coverage that used to be the benchmark of the print media realm. Similar to video production, this has stimulated media outlets to attempt to get into the podcasting business, with similarly mixed results to video. In the podcast realm, it helps to already have an established audience (i.e be a celebrity), and the competition can be brutal. Once again it comes down to the value of the content itself, and if the media member can excel in the podcast medium.
Yet whether it’s short-form video or long-form podcasts, one underlying problem that remains for these mediums—and where online print media thrives—is the ability to effectively search the content for facts, information, sources, quotes, opinions, and all the other elements that it’s the underlying responsibility of journalism to deliver to its consumers.
The title and basic subject of a short-form video can be searched for in many cases. In fact since Google owns YouTube, you’re very likely to find videos at the top of your search results for certain subjects. But what if you’re attempting to search for a specific statistic, or a certain quote embedded in a video, and not listed in the video’s title or description?
In the case of a print article, you can search for a specific fact, phrase, quote, subject, source, person, or location, not just via a search engine, but in the specific piece of media by honing in on keywords or phrases. You can’t do this with video. This is what made the internet age the “Age of Information,” because so much information was right at our fingertips. However when that information is delivered in audio or video form, you’re limited in your ability to find it. This is one of the reasons that the coding language Flash—despite its enhanced visual components compared to PHP and HTML—was universally outmoded across the internet. It’s inability to display in words that were able to be searchable made it obsolete.
The other element that hindered Flash, and hinders video content today is the inability to link to source material or to other articles. Hyperlinking is what made print media in the internet age such an engaging, enriching, and valuable commodity. It was like a Choose Your Own Adventure novel, with links presented so readers could delve deeper into subjects if they chose, and where information could be verified by third parties cited in a story. In an environment where information is presented in audio or video form, such expansion or verification is more difficult. The only location to link to sources in a video is in its description, which is often marginalized compared to the video itself, or for certain media outlet’s embedded players, is non-existent.
This is an even bigger problem for long-form podcasts. Episodes of The Joe Rogan Experience can exceed three hours, with many topics discussed. Unless a print journalist puts the effort out to transcribe certain elements of a podcast interview, then an opinion, a topic, and important quote, etc., is left only for the audience of the podcast itself, instead of spreading on the internet via print, social media, and hyperlinks. At the same time, long-form podcasts have distinct advantages to print in the informal environment they present content in, and the ability to delve deeper into subjects than certain print media. Some consumers are willing to listen to a 3-hour podcast, even if it means listening in installments, to get that deeper insight into one of their favorite public personalities. To read a story that takes three hours to consume feels like a much bigger commitment from both the consumer, and the journalist to produce it.
Print media, and many of the companies that disseminate it, haven’t been doing themselves any favors either. With many local newspapers putting their print coverage behind paywalls, or loading up print articles with autoplay video streaming ads and popups, access to print media coverage has never been more difficult. In the case of a video, consumers may not enjoy having to suffer through a 15 to 30-second commercial before the video starts, but they know what to expect. When you click on a print story from many traditional print media outlets, often you’re immediately met with multiple popup-style advertisements, autoplay video players, or questionnaires that can be overwhelming.
What many print outlets are doing with their video budgets are producing short summation videos of the print content as an alternative for people who prefer the video medium. However these autoplay videos start immediately, sometimes at the same time as a video ad also embedded on the page, resulting in a garbled mess. Consumers who may be looking to read something in a work environment or a quiet space such as a library are turned off by this experience. Also, the potential higher advertising revenues an outlet might receive by integrating video also come with higher production costs, and increased bounce rates from people who don’t want video, and prefer to read. Video also consumes precious data on the mobile plans of consumers, where the footprint of print media is comparatively light. If you click on an article expecting print, but receive a streaming autoplay video, the data cost can be significant even if you click away relatively quickly.
The skill set of the media member is also key in deciding the best way to present content. Some media members thrive with the help of an eraser or backspace key, while others work best being put on the spot in front of a microphone or camera. For example, Saving Country Music was in the podcast business way before podcasting was cool, but decided print was the best format for its particular goal. In fact print was at the heart of the strategy to promote independent artists through outreaching to disgruntled mainstream country music fans using search engines to look for alternatives or like-minded opinions. Podcasting can also have outreach qualities, but can be more limited in reaching outside of the defined demographic the podcast is designed to appeal to in the first place.
The answer is not that print media is superior to video media, or podcasting can’t do what print can. The truth is that each individual story has an optimum format for it to be presented to the public, and each media member has an optimum medium in which they work. For some subjects, print is imperative for covering a story in the in-depth and involved way that only print media can, with sources cited via hyperlink and searchable facts at your fingertips. Sometimes video is superior because of the visual component of a story, or the need for additional engagement with the audience. Sometimes an audio or video podcast is best, still stimulating the theater of the mind, but presenting it in a more conversational manner.
The problem is when we think any one medium is the only one we should disseminate or consume our media through. Since print has been around the longest, it’s easy to fall for the idea that it’s arcane in the multimedia-driven internet age. But in truth, print’s venerable, verifiable, straightforward, data-light, an idea-rich format is exactly what we need for a healthy balance in a cluttered and noisy media landscape.
July 12, 2017 @ 8:19 am
Interesting piece about balancing out and identifying the right mode of communication and highlighting source traceability. It’s one the big reasons that I script the hell out of my videos as a critic and publish transcripts and the text review on my blog along with the video content, which I think is essential to offer alternatives for followers who don’t have time for the video or reading an extended piece.
Granted, I started in text-driven reviews and I could probably do better in directly linking to sources, but when I need to I’ll include links in the descriptions. But granted, I’m speaking as a music critic making more opinion-driven content, and less of a journalist, and I don’t envy the larger burden of accountability demanded there. I’d like to think that my approach of text and video could work for both, but I’m not going to deny that production of that takes significant time/budgets, especially if you’re aiming for any veneer of professionalism.
In short, no easy answer, but I think there’s a point to understanding which mode of communication is most effective to your audience while balancing what’ll pay the bills in the end. A delicate balance, to be sure, but it can be achieved.
July 17, 2017 @ 1:20 am
“… think there’s a point to understanding which mode of communication is most effective to your audience while balancing what’ll pay the bills in the end. A delicate balance, to be sure, but it can be achieved.”
Nah, not really thinking about paying the bills, not thinking about money, just focusing on what makes me feel good where passion comes into play; just a normal human being trying to find truth, vitality and life.
July 12, 2017 @ 8:20 am
Excellent points, Trig.
And for those of us who can read quickly, reading takes a LOT less time than sitting through an hour-long podcast.
July 12, 2017 @ 8:59 am
Yes, indeed. I don’t have the patience for listening to people ramble on when I could read the content in a fraction of the time.
July 12, 2017 @ 8:34 am
I think the key word to it all is “balance”. I wrote a piece yesterday that cited “On The Verge” data. It was much easier to look up/easily find it in text form on some website than it was to have to watch an entire video on it. In terms of more journalistic/fact based pieces, text is almost essential.
Now, is there a place for video? I say yes, but only for certain things. Mark Grondin who commented above is a Youtube critic. I like watching his videos, and I like watching other critics such as The Needle Drop. What they do is opinion driven rather than say what Trigger does which is report on the facts (I mean, you do reviews as well but you do MORE than that is what I’m saying, and am I wrong in assuming that SCM is known more for reporting on the facts?). I’m not looking for any hardcore facts – I’m just looking to see (hear?) what they have to say.
And you know what? More often than not if they do have a blog I’ll just read the review at first too before I watch it. I prefer reading as opposed to watching, but I also like watching as well.
Plus, as Mark said above, you need both options for people who don’t like one option. Some people would rather read. Some would rather watch. That’s cool. But the answer shouldn’t be to take one option away from people. That seems like it would hurt more than it would help. Counter productive rather than productive really.
July 12, 2017 @ 8:46 am
Excellent article, where did that come from? Very pertinent to your own medium and the current trends as well.
I would go a little further in saying some podcasts and video content have great value in the the category of interview/discussion. Intelligent, unbiased discussion is starting to disappear in our society today. And as you mentioned these two categories would be cumbersome to include in print as it doesnt always convey the emotion or brevity of a conversation, as well as shear size. Joe Rogan is pretty smart for the “average Joe, and brings lots of viewers lots of different opinions. This is great.
But if you really want to learn new things and expand your mind nothing can replace print. When you read it fires the synapses in the analytical side of your brain forging new pathways. When you watch videos it is more in the pleasure side and doesn’t create as much activity.
Really good article, should be shared.
July 12, 2017 @ 9:02 am
Excellent article, Trigger! Your choice to gear SCM towards online print journalism has really made it stand out in terms of in-depth analysis, quality writing, and trustworthiness. There have been numerous instances where SCM has been the only meaningful Google result for various country music topics, which shows how your dedication to original content has paid off. Online media mavens, take note: you don’t have to become a video/slideshow clickbait site to be successful.
Also, speaking of podcasts, it is a really tough row to hoe when you don’t have the backing of a major brand, media company, or celebrity. When you have 100 other podcasts talking about the exact same thing, it’s hard to stand out. Doing a podcast can be a fun experience, but if you’re not established or backed in some way, it will be a labor of love with little-to-no return on investment. Undoubtedly, the proliferation of podcasts in the online sphere (especially among YouTube celebrities) is due to lucrative sponsorship deals and opportunities to sell additional merchandise or subscriptions.
July 12, 2017 @ 9:35 am
I prefer print. However, I’ve been getting into podcasts (mostly college football) because I listen to them while I work – landscaping 10-12 hours a day.
Video is good for sports – showing/ breaking down plays. But, you have to sit through 30 seconds of commercials for 1:20 of content on foxsports and si. Click on a dozen videos and you’ve watched 10 min of ads. I don’t have time for that.
July 12, 2017 @ 10:15 am
What a coincidence, I also do landscaping/groundskeeping and I’ve recently started listening to podcasts.
July 12, 2017 @ 1:02 pm
That’s funny. I usually start my day with podcasts or streaming news, then music the second half of the day. I have go-to albums at the end of the day – anything Cody Jinks, Alabama Live (1988) – the best life album ever – and the new Bob Wayne. Trig hasn’t covered Bad Hombre and I get why – it’s predictable. But, it’s an awesome end of the day album.
July 12, 2017 @ 4:30 pm
I tend to listen to an album or two, and then a podcast to switch things up. This week, my favorite records have been been Jason Isbell- Live in Alabama, Slaid Cleaves- Ghost on the Car Radio, and Blaze Foley- The Dog Years
July 12, 2017 @ 9:38 am
Also, I’ve been thinking a SCM podcast would be effective because you could sample the music you’re discussing. But that might run a foul with copywrite issues.
July 12, 2017 @ 12:13 pm
I’ve been trying for over two years to find a smart way to re-enter the podcasting business, and I would be open to the opportunity if the right one presented itself. But what can’t happen is it take so much of my time or bog me down in logistics that it takes away from my efforts in the print medium, which is where I believe I thrive. There’s been discussions with other parties and such, but the right situation still has yet to materialize.
July 17, 2017 @ 1:28 am
I’ll pray for you, it’s good when eras of development come really enrich culture / civilization.
July 12, 2017 @ 12:40 pm
so where’s the inexpensive widget that will translate podcasts to text, and vice versa?
July 12, 2017 @ 8:15 pm
“What many print outlets are doing with their video budgets are producing short summation videos of the print content as an alternative for people who prefer the video medium. However these autoplay videos start immediately, sometimes at the same time as a video ad also embedded on the page, resulting in a garbled mess.”
I use a screen reader, and “garbled mess” is right. these things render it impossible to navigate around on Web sites, even if there is print, because it keeps me from being able to hear. This in turn keeps me from getting anything out of the site or coming back to it. I prefer print because I can access it; as Mark Grondin said above, he might have print in his videos, but I can’t read that. I’d prefer to read text. With podcasts and some of the YouTube videos, vision isn’t necessary at all, and I do enjoy listening to them. I think the key is balance, and I certainly get people who prefer things in a visual format. I agree with your reasoning that searching and linking is easier with print as well. But I think the alienating of people who don’t benefit from a visual component is another underlying problem and no doubt a problem many people simply overlook, and understandably. For what it’s worth, I apprreciate this site and others like it that don’t have videos and ads making my reading experience more headache-inducing.
July 13, 2017 @ 2:53 am
Just out of the experience as an old school DJ – we did not ramble like DJs often do today. We wrote scripts for the show. I used these scripts later as part in my written record reviews.
That said, several of the podcasts I used to watch, hear, I quit. Too much redundancy, not structured. Often going from point A to point C and as a listener, you start wondering where point B is (or was.) This is mostly the case in political podcasts I used to listen to but has now crept up in the entertainment business as well.
The only podcasts/videocasts I may listen to these days are from respectable media (whatever that means in today’s terms). Else I’m still reading two to three hours every day, yes mostly on the internet. And I still cherish the power of the written word. Even if a review or an op-ed rub against my grain, if it’s well written, I still enjoy it.
As to video content – often, engaging with the public is mistaken as reducing the information to the lowest common denominator, and actually misleading from true information to infotainment, which I have no interest to consume. What used to be a side note (like personal details of an artist) has now become the main story.
And that’s very sad. Really bad examples of journalism like this can be watched on a daily basis through country sites, like Taste of Country. Even though their video podcasts are scripted, the content and the delivery is nothing but fluff.
July 13, 2017 @ 6:53 am
I’ve been finding this more on major news sites like WSJ and Bloomberg. I’ll se an interesting headline and click on it only to discover its video only. Disappointing.
July 13, 2017 @ 8:35 am
Features are getting cut left and right at newspapers. It’s so weird that what magazines live and die by – the face on the cover and an interview with that face inside – just doesn’t get the numbers to survive in newspaper.
July 13, 2017 @ 7:10 pm
Interesting article. I’m a fan of podcasts, as I can listen while I’m at work and can still be productive. I work in the commercial office furniture industry. Cubicle walls have been getting lower and lower, over the years. There’s an expression in my industry, earbuds are the new privacy panel. I’ve always viewed podcasts as a way for me to do my focused work. With earbuds in, I don’t have to hear my neighbors sales call, or innane conversations about where a coworker bought a dress. I’ve never viewed them as an alternative to print media, more of an alternative to talk radio.
Hopefully this trend doesn’t continue. There is a need for print. Podcasts are entertainment. I don’t like the blurring of the line between the two. We just continue to slide closer to a reality resembling “Idiocracy”. Vote Camacho! … I mean The Rock…
July 14, 2017 @ 7:33 am
Print over podcasts any day.
July 17, 2017 @ 1:24 am
I prefer the 4 hour podcasts myself while I’m whittling sticks or chewin’ sunflower seeds or even pickin’ my guitar.
Any one ever hear of the History of Rome series? Or, Revolutions?
But yeah, you really got to have the T Rex personality to pull it off and be coming from a place of truth not trying to deceive your audience with mere show but solid information, technique, and substance.
Wonderful article Trig!
July 19, 2017 @ 12:07 pm
This article really spoke to me, as a fan of print. I, too, have noticed the increasing difficulty of accessing text-based articles without machine-freezing videos and flashing pop-ups. One of the things I like so much about this blog is its format and dedication to the long form essay. Keep print alive.