As television newsrooms expect more of their journalists to work solo, the trend is affecting both the process of newsgathering and the product that goes on the air. Many news managers believe VJs offer more flexibility at a lower cost with little or no reduction in quality. But new research suggests it’s not all good news.
Mary Bock of Kutztown University spent two years studying the VJ revolution. Her unpublished dissertation highlights many of the challenges faced by journalists who report, shoot, write and edit. Some may be obvious: It’s tough to do this kind of physical work and still look good at 5 p.m., one VJ told her.
A bigger concern is what Bock’s analysis reveals about how the use of VJs is changing the content of TV news.
Pre-planned stories
“Because they work alone, VJs will be more apt to look for quick and easy access to story elements,” Bock writes. “Instead of the smaller cameras and simpler software making it easier to take chances, television VJs see themselves as having less freedom to take chances with their stories.”
So, Bock says, the trend toward using VJs for daily news has resulted in more stories that are mapped out–or even written–in advance. “It‘s not like the old days when you‘d go out and see what was actually happening and then decide how to cover it,” one VJ told Bock.
VJs who work for television organizations and must deliver a package a day, every day complained that they are unable to contend with heavier, hard news materials, and spend more of their time covering easy, one-location feature stories. This contradicts what some of the managers interviewed for this project perceived as a positive characteristic of video journalism. Managers who favor singular production see VJs are more easily deployed and better able to cover spot news, especially when two or three are sent to cover multiple angles of a hard-news story. That may well be. But based on the interviews and observations of the television VJs who participated in this project, their day-to-day experience seems one of a constant struggle to be taken seriously, not only in terms of their technical skills but the types of stories they cover.
Physical challenges
Another struggle for many VJs is the physical strain of working alone. “This is a craft that demands not only intellectual capacity but real physical stamina and a lot of people are not going to be able to do this simply because they haven‘t got the stamina,” one VJ says. And Bock reports that the National Union of Journalists in England is starting to hear health complaints–such as exhaustion or back problems–from VJs who have been on the job a few years.
There’s also the problem of doors.
As mundane as they are, doors pose problems for VJs because their hands are nearly always full, and they have no partner. Getting through a door with the equipment, and protecting the equipment from being damaged by a slamming door, is a daily challenge. (One VJ reports a new appreciation for automatic doors!)
Bock’s research does point to some advantages for VJs. Smaller cameras are less intimidating so interview subjects open up more easily, and solo journalists can gather elements for stories when they’re out and about, without having to worry about scheduling a photographer.
But she also finds that solo journalists can’t do the same work as quickly as a team of two, which has led some news managers to reassess the value of VJs. One manager said he’d rather have two people do more, and do it quickly. “I‘m not saying it‘s completely worthless,” he told Bock, “I‘m just saying for day in, day out, where the rubber meets the road – not happening.”
I’d have to disagree with the idea that VJ’s are more scripted than traditional production teams. I’ve been a VJ/Citizen Journalist for three years now. And I was given tremendous freedom by MTV News (Street Team ’08) and CNN iReport to go out and stumble upon great content and then bring it back. Being in a pool of 51 VJs for MTV and thousands for CNN, I had no expectations so I literally could just follow my nose. But it takes instinct and editorial judgment to get Web 2.0-prime content, perhaps something other VJ’s have lacked but were hired because of a keen technological skill set and ability to edit.
Interesting, Deborah, but there are marked differences in feelings, attitudes and abilities between those who used to gather news with two-person crews and those who’ve come up as VJs/MMJs. The reality is that the newsroom needs both, but I think you’ll see any negativity involving the VJ model fade with time. Of course, I also think we’re headed into an era of experimentation with finished product presentation, too, which may also factor into the matter. Best to you.
Deborah,
I would like to point out that TV journalists have always complained about workloads. At one time there 4 person crews, then 3 person crews, then 2 person crews and now we have more one person crews. This is a competitive business and it’s not designed for everyone to succeed. You must compete at the highest level to succeed. TV journalists with good attitudes succeed far more often than ones with bad attitudes.
Good luck everyone,
Mark Carlson
One of the things I found interesting about the VJ complaints are the issues of lugging equipment while working. I think one of the overlooked issues in the VJ debate is that many stations decide to convert to the VJ model and don’t think about the type of equipment they need to pull it off the right way. I’ve seen too many places that decide to go VJ, but expect the reporters to use the same equipment that was being used by 2-person crews. There is gear out there that is portable, small, efficient, and can get the job done being used by only one person, but stations need to be willing to purchase that equipment (which is a lot cheaper than the gear they have been using).
Erica, I don’t believe your experience as a VJ is typical of local television newsrooms.
Local TV doesn’t have a pool of 51 people from which to draw. There are a fixed number of reporters, just enough to fill the “news hole.” There is no slack anymore, because the formatting of the shows is predictable enough.
In theory, sending a swarm out to find the real news (wherever or whatever) should lead to greater enterprise, but it simply doesn’t. You’re expected to turn something every single day, and that means the Easy Turn gets followed while the investigative piece becomes radioactive.
In theory, you’d have people working on several stories simultaneously, grabbing B-roll and interviews as it was most convenient, and assembling the pieces that were closest to being ready. But that doesn’t happen either, because the reporters in the field – who ought to be closest to the now – get their marching orders by producers who have a vested interest in the next newscast only.
The VJ is an old form. All that has changed is the technology. I started in film, carried a Bach Auricon, 16mm mag stripe camera and a recorder. I put a stick in the trunk of the news car that had a line to focus upon, when I planted the damn thing in the local soybean or cotton field to do stand ups.
On a good day, the other reporter would shoot my stuff and I would should his. Our journalism improved when when had a shooter. Guess what? the same is true today. VJ’s are best at experiental stories and stories told visually,without contentious sound bites. VJ shops cover consensus news, not conflict. they are inherently dull and off the woop and warp of the real concerns of their community.
The division of labor in newsrooms did not grow like Topsy. It developed because some folks reporter better than others, some shoot better, edit better etc. VJ’s have their place, but they have done more to make everyone look the same than encourage unique storytelling.
The fellows who say VJ’s have released them to better, in depth stories are kidding themselves. Modern VJ’s are about cost saving, not quality improvement.
Hi all –
First off, thanks to Deborah for putting the spotlight on some of the key issues that concern VJs. They work hard — no matter where they work — and I am grateful to all of the VJs who participated in my research.
Erika — your experience is echoed by many of the VJs I studied who have been given freedom to pursue their subjects in depth and with a timeframe that allows them to do good work. The VJs who find themselves compelled to cover the low-hanging fruit (AKA “quick and dirty” or “one-stop-shopping”) stories were the ones who are being asked to turn a story — or more — a day. The experience of VJs working for citizen websites and newspaper websites is different.
Terry — the TV newsroom model that seems to work well is indeed the one with a good mix of skill sets.
Mark — taking note of the physicaility of the job is not so much a matter of complaining by VJs as a reality. I heard very little actual complaining about hard work; most of the concern from the subjects of my study were aimed at the quality of the product. Also, the physicality of the job is something that non-photographic journalists often find surprising…writers are accustomed to working with abstractions: words, ideas, facts. You can’t phone in a video journalism story — you simply have to go from place to place; you have to be there. That’s a source of stress and pressure.
Geoffrey — I too found VJ newsrooms in which staff were expected to carry older, large, conventional equipment. Their dedication amazed me.
Ike — well yes. Your comments reflect my findings.
Finally, I need to point out that this was a qualitative study, meaning that it’s not a survey with a large sample size. I interviewed more than 80 people in a wide variety of contexts — citizen journalism, the BBC, local TV, hyperlocal cable, national newspaper and local newspaper VJs. I interviewed them, followed them around, and watched them work at news events. The result is a study that goes into depth and detail, but not the breadth one would expect from a large-scale survey. I cannot and do not claim to speak for all VJs, but I have made every effort to tell fairly and accurately represent those who granted me access to their daily routines.
The dissertation is 501 pages long — I took Clifford Geertz’s notion of “thick description” literally, I fear. Should anyone want a copy, I’m glad to share — just drop an e-mail.
Cheers,
Mary Angela Bock
[...] How VJs are changing TV news | NewsLab (tags: vj mmj) [...]
[...] Shared How VJs are changing TV news | NewsLab. [...]
Steve Cohen,
Based on your broad stroke analysis, I must be kidding myself.
I, too, began as a photographer who carried CP-16 and processed my film. TK’s, despite their painful shoulder plates, were a luxury way back then.
I shot my last complete story as a reporter/photographer in 1979, and went on to a decent career in reporting at both the network and local level. In the process, I worked with some of the best shooters in the business…guys like Ken Swartz, who won the national NPPA three times (I believe), and taught me even more.
Last spring, KGO-TV (aka ABC7) gave me a camera and asked me to shoot and edit some of the longer form stories that I love, but a lack of resources prevented. While I am not close to being as good a shooter as our staffers, and while I miss them, it has opened doors for a 56 year old guy with old school standards, No, it is not optimal compared to the good days that we knew, but it works.
Frankly, it’s no longer a matter of them making me shoot. Now, it’s when do I GET to shoot. As long as we stick to HFR’s and non-daily news, the model can work. It’s clean, cost-effective, and broadens the range of what we cover.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=7546958
You don’t need to do a 2 year study to know what most who work in the business already know. VJ’s are good for basic daily news gathering. They aren’t good for every kind of story.
Most daily TV news stories are pretty basic and simple to start with. They don’t need a video photographer with multiple NPPA awards and a vacuous TV reporter in a suit to cover most TV news stories.
I laughed when it talked about the physical strain. Really?? If a 3-5 pound camcorder is too much for a “journalist” to carry then the “journalist” should go to the gym or find another job. When I started a one man band reporter had to carry a huge tube camera and a huge 3/4 inch tape deck. Not sure, but it had to be 50 lbs combined. 3-5 lbs camcorder? Come on.
There are a lot of people who have physically demanding jobs. A VJ is simply not one of them. What the study didn’t reveal is how much people like to whine and complain in TV news.
Though I’ve never considered myself a VJ, I do shoot, write and edit my own stories on a daily basis – by choice. The study you cited raises some good points regarding story selection and execution. But it loses ALL MERIT when it touches on the physicality of the job. Photogs have been humping gear sans reporters since the beginning of television and no one ever raised concern over their health and tamina. That it’s now a concern solely because an on-air journalist has to do the lifting is LAUGHABLE. Anyone who thinks TV news is excessively strenuous should get a job in the real world. I for one welcome the thinning of the herd that’s now upon us, for if local TV news is going to survive it must finally cast off all vestiges of Vaudeville. Do VJ’s make better TV? Rarely, but it can be done. Should we be concerned because some Katie Couric wannabe has to sweat? Hardly. There are many legitimate concerns when it comes to VJ’s. Citing the inherent physicality of the job as an impediment to quality is the least of them. FAIL.
[...] that I carry a camera and questions into battle unaccompanied every day – but the findings of a recent study really chaps my batteries. Actually, it’s not the whole study, for it raises some valid [...]
[...] my blue-collar upbringing, or maybe it’s my learned disdain for academia – but a recent study really chaps my batteries. Actually, the study has some merit, for in elucidating the obvious it [...]
Stewart, I don’t think the research cites the physical issues as an impediment to quality. They’re just noted as one of the things VJs have to deal with. As someone who started in TV before videotape, I have to agree with you and Jim that today’s gear is light as a feather by comparison to what we had back then.
Mary Bock says she’d be happy to discuss her findings further with anyone who wants to get in touch.
Hi all — thanks for weighing in.
Wayne — yes, your experience of being able to shoot for yourself is reflected in some of the interviews I conducted with VJs. The problems enter when individuals are asked to turn a piece a day or more.
Jim — this is a book-length project, and the highlight here does not have the space to contend with the relationship between the physicality of the job and the product. The VJs who mentioned the “workout” of their day were not complaining as much as noting how different it was. Not a single one of my sources should be maligned for being a tenderfoot. More often, the real “body” issue is one of getting that body from place to place in adequate time to shoot and make deadlines. That IS a legitimate source of stress and it DOES have an impact on story selection. And no, it doesn’t take two years to figure out that a camera is heavy, but it does take two years to research and write a book.
Lenslinger — see above. And perhaps, before slinging the word “Fail” at the research, you might consider reading it.
I understand my previous post didn’t have a link for my address — it’s bock — at — kutztown.edu
– Mary
It’s not so much the weight of the little cameras that’s the problem, but their ergonomics. Unlike a big camera, which lets you use your whole body to support/steady it when doing handheld work, all the weight of the little cameras is at the end of your arms. I’ve been a news photographer for more than twenty years and have always used full-sized cameras but I have freelanced with the small cameras when I worked part-time at a local concert venue a few years back. It’s *much* harder to hold a little camera steady than it is with a full-sized one and, after an evening of shooting handheld (2-3 hours), I was much more tired than I had been when my employer had larger rigs.
And that was with a “naked” camera, with no shotgun mic, light, wireless receiver, etc strapped to it (like in the photo above). Once you start adding that kind of stuff, the “lightweight” camera really isn’t one any more and it doesn’t surprise me that VJs are starting to report health problems because of it. I’d hate to use one for ENG work.
To echo Lenslinger to some extent, I’ve toted the big rigs for a long time and the physicality of the job is the least difficult thing about it for me and I’m definitely no gym rat (my main form of excercise being grudge-carrying).
As one of the old timers put it, “Cameras don’t cover stories, reporters do.”
You can put a fancy consultant’s label on a one man band, but at the end of the day all you have is someone who can’t cover breaking news.
As a OMB reporter I agree that the smaller cameras are much less work to lug around. However, many of you are forgetting the dozens of stations (mine included) that still use the traditional 30 lb camera (with shotgun mic, mic receiver, battery, light, etc…). Then tack on the 15 lb tri-pod and light kit and don’t forget to somehow take notes, respond to emails, tweet and call at the same time. Is it impossible? No I do it every single day. However, it sure is hard word and for someone to say otherwise is ignoring the facts.
As a OMB, I use every minute of every day. Like most of my colleagues, I do not have the luxury of writing my web story and 11 p.m. vo/sot as my 5 and 6 p.m. pkg’s are edited. I do it all and work very long days because of it. I also have a hard time lining stories up because I’m working on that day’s story from 9:30-7:00 p.m. By the time my day is done, most every business is closed and very little can be setup in advance.
Am I complaining, no. I love this job and I knew what I was getting into. However, it does bother me when people cite OMB’s for being lazy or just a complaining bunch. We have a tough job and we have the right to discuss what some of the everyday challenges are.
It is true that the tv station now day prefer to hire a one man band , because the lower cost to produce stories , with one person you have a entire pkg every day . it is a new lower standards that we are seeing now day . they want quantity , not quality, i will tell you why .
what a journalist do is to point the camara where the accion is , also edit in a flat style the pkg . why do i say that ? well , do you ask your self how much time does it take to form a good photographer or editor ? only to see if the person is going to have the talent to understand the language of the camara , to deliver a visual speech or how much time does it take to get to know the proper use of the diferents lights to create something meaningful to our eyes , or edit any pkg as a piece of art .
If you ask yourself , what do you remember after seeing every story , problably you wont remember the words that the reporer said , you got to know what was it about in general , but what you really will remember are the images and the sound and the way the pkg or the report was presented to you ,the way it touched your mood .In that moment is when all of us say HOOOO , GOOD JOB.
NOW , i will tell you about the writing , five question is all you have to respond , WHEN , WHERE , WHY , HOW AND WHO . once you have that clear and use a little imagination you are able to write a script, of course , there are people who write very well and others not .
this is for all the managers who want to go cheap, every reporter when they want to look good they will look for a good photographer , a good editor , and at the end of the day that is piece that they will show with proud .
any journalist who started shoot and edit, and set up a set of lights as a one man band knows if he or she are are going to do the job in a profesional way or they only will show flat images , as all of us have seen them so far. but we say nothing because we respect them too.
Ive been a OMB for nearly 17 years. For a brief time I did what used to be the normal set up. Photog and reporter. I tired very quickly of trying to please prima dona reporters and trying to teach newbies right out of college what to do. Skills they should have picked up in class rather than spending their time trying to make a demo tape for job interviews.
I would never go back to the old way. I have a freedom now that was never there when working the old way. Yes, its harder, yes I sometimes wish there was someone else to make the contacts and set up stories but its all part of the gig now.
I do have it easier than most OMBs, I dont have to do packages very often…most of my stuff is vo/sots and move on to the next story…run and gun. I dont care a witt about packages ….Im all about breaking news.
I guess part of the success of my OMB is that the station has assigned me a reporter “on call”. If I feel the story warrants a package, I talk to the desk and they send a reporter out to meet me, so its really the best of both worlds. Maybe if some of the stations that have gone to OMBs tried this method and tried to be a little more flexible, then we might see more success with OMBs.
The debate continues. Thanks, Steve, for your insights. I agree that flexibility is one of the keys to making a VJ system work. And I appreciate One Man Band’s comment that many stations still expect solo journalists to work with older, heavier gear, which adds to the challenges they face. Eventually, they’ll transition to lighter gear but in the meantime, it’s a tough slog.
[...] co-worker sent me this link today from NewsLab titled, “How VJs are changing TV news.” It was written more than a [...]