Newspaper video: Guardian to spend a million on web video

According to Journalism.co.uk, the Guardian is looking to spend £1 million in video production and hiring relevant production staff.

Currently self-taught reporters and camera people put projects together.

“We don’t think we can go forward without proper resources and reporters,” he said.

(insert mike myers Dr Evil style voice) One Million pounds!

What could you do with a million pounds worth of investment in digital newspaper video? (okay I know that a million squid doesn’t buy much in the way of underlying infrastructure – servers and pipes etc but it’s still a hell of a lot of money)

Here are two options:

  1. Recreate a TV news station so that you can output lots of content rather than sell it to others like, say, Newsnight
  2. Invest in lots of great kit and train every Guardian reporter and journalist to use it.

I wonder which one the guardian will chose.

10 Replies to “Newspaper video: Guardian to spend a million on web video”

  1. Two very interesting options there, first of all it’s good to see the investment from the point of view of a graduate about to enter the job market.

    I’d hope they go for option two, I think training everyone to use it and opening up multimedia to everyone would be a good way to go. Creating a TV station would be interesting, but I can’t see The Guardian going for that.

  2. By station, I was suggesting, that they may be tempted by the TV not web video treatment. But I think there will almost certainly be a good deal of saying the want it to be one thing whilst actually doing the other.I’ll leave it up to you to decide which way round.

    Of course they havent said what it will be at all yet. So we will see.

  3. Truth is £1m doesn’t buy you much – think the costs of paying for staff, NI, pensions, equipping them and then … sending them out to cover stuff. Hotel bills, car hire. News costs more than you think and I speak having run (probably) the most cost-effective multi-skilled news outfit in broadcasting. Still, it’s not a bad little commissioning budget for off beat indie features.

  4. Adrian

    As I said, I realise that 1 million in reality doesnt buy you a hell of a lot. But, it should buy a hell of a lot more newspaper video than broadcast. As you say ‘not a bad little commissioning budget’

    TV news costs a hell of a lot and if the Guardian go down my option one route you may find yourself with a nice consultancy job advising on saving money. But as we are all fond of saying newspaper video isnt TV.

    They already have the staff and the kit can be cheap. On that basis I still think 1 million quid buys a lot of ‘time’ to develop great newspaper video.

  5. Dear all,

    £1 million pound is more than enough for a web video project in terms VJ training, an inhouse studio, equipments DVcams + laptops and a complete webtv structure instead of having video disseminated all over the site.

    The guardian is a respactable newspaper with a distinct readership so if they are going to offer videos I suggest they think about that readership first.

    I also suggest they think hard about the format and content.

    -Short spin offs interviews of hard news

    -Short video profiles, short documentaies….

    -Short sport clips, fashion clips, restaurant guides and whatever editorial content they think can captivate their readership.

    they should think about the added value proposition of having videos that has a social component such as send by email, paste in your blogs and so on.

    Having a video podacst and syndicate all their videos to third party websitex will increase an audience which is outside the UK as the internet is a global market place.

    -There is also an element of doing video guides or a video classifieds section and cash in with instream video adverts.

    What they should not attempt to do is to braodcast live on the web….

    They should sound me out and I would set the whole thing for them for few pounds.

    Good work Andy,

    Best regards

  6. By TV station style I was talking more about producing with the ultimate goal of distributing to broadcasters as much as through their own web site.

    That rather than trying to integrate video more in to their output under one ‘Guardian’ Banner.

    I think there is a difference between the kind of site that supplies its stories in different media and those that simply use the site as a menu for everything they do. One is a coherent product , the other is a set of channels.

    I don’t think the Guardian has enough ‘brand equity’ to be able to do that yet – not far off though.

    I just think they would miss a trick not to go for a really unified web product rather than simply a web interface.

Leave a Reply