| SENSING THE NEWS: CONFERENCE PROJECTS
Participants in the
Sensing the News workshop
worked in small groups to develop reports on the new technologies
explored during the conference. NewsLab and the Institute for New
Media Studies at the University of Minnesota asked them to put issues
of cost aside, and simply to consider what journalists might do
with new technologies. Here is their advice to the news industry:
INTERACTIVE AND IMMERSIVE AUDIO
The group decided first to define what it is they were talking
about. Interactive: you can contribute, participatory, call in,
add audio files, manipulate audio. Immersive: like 360 degree sound,
a special, stereo environment.
Uses in news: Oral history indexed by topic so
you could choose what you want to hear. Bird sounds, categorized
by zip code, so you could hear birds in your neighborhood, and add
your own. Sonic dictionary. Tours of proposed designs, like a new
theater, hear the acoustics, audio tour. Walking tour of historical
sites, similar to what Janet Carter, an installation audio artist
based in Toronto does. You get a headset and stereo walkman. Her
footsteps are your guide, you walk at same pace. (Imagine these
other uses: Let people hear speech in original language while you
read the text in your own language. Have the writer read a story
so you experience it in their words. "In their own words" over a
couple of still photos, aftermath of a hurricane for example, with
several people's versions. See Washpost.com
U Street example.)
Education: Audio recording and production. Give
students parts of story. Let them line up clips and create sequence.
Demonstrate use of microphone, how placement affects sound you get.
How to be attentive to sound as you are out recording. Listening
skills.
Technology: Could you manipulate where you are
in the sound the way you can with video shot with multiple cameras?
Not yet developed in audio technology.
Research: Impact of audio in comprehension and
memory. What are the limits of audio quality. The rule of thumb
is that if the audio continues people will stay with story, even
if video is gone. What is needed to be able to produce this kind
of audio? Decisions about when you make an audio vs. a visual story.
Now it's often based on functionality, but it should be an artistic
decision as well, knowing when to use your craft (immersive audio
makes it feel as if you are in someone's head…). In the experience
of WashingtonPost.com, no one clicks on the audio-only version when
video is available. What would motivate people to pay more attention
to what they are listening to, that is, to choose the audio-only
version? Suggestion: a "no wait" sign?
WEB CAMS
Livewave.com
is an example of a current Web cam that can be user-driven. It allows
you to cover news from wherever you are: Logan Airport, I-93. The
cams are cheap, software is cheap, but they need a lot of bandwidth,
which is expensive. They are designed for professional coverage.
"Drive it yourself" cameras. Issues? What is the implied right of
privacy in public space? Jeff Gralnick points out that the privacy
problem is not what you show but what you say while it's on the
air. ABC used video of a street scene and talked about smuggling.
A person who could be identified sued, and had a case. Warning to
industry--think about it. Flexibility: Use Web cams for live reporting,
anywhere you can get online using a laptop, camera and digital cellphone.
Education: rehearsal of on camera presentations. Example: Inexpensive
software like Visual Communicator by seriousmagic.com.
Includes greenscreen chromakey, drag and drop video capability.
Web cams: orange micro, firewire. USB1 type gets you bad quality.
Buy a firewire card for $40, plug it in, stream at a good rate on
a 200 Pentium. Moving toward using this (Web cam video) in IM.
360 DEGREE PHOTO AND VIDEO
Uses in news: When there is lots of action; when
you need to provide context; when the user drives and the journalist
guides; to expand view of existing image (pulling out to go wide,
show still image and let user see the context in which it was taken
so you can get the environment photographer was in); when you want
to take the viewer where he or she can't normally go (distant or
unsafe places); to unmask what's going on behind the scenes (empty
room). When not to use it? Not for all cases or stories. There are
times when framing either with camera or words gives you focus and
provides definition to make a story work. Otherwise it may not make
sense. Applications? Tours, press conferences, smaller enclosed
places rather than large landscapes, riots or breaking news. The
journalist can say: if you move left you can see…but the user would
drive the image. Imagine an intermediate experience. Not a reporter
narrated or just user driven (no instruction or context), but reporter
as guide: I've been here, I've looked around, let me give you some
advice. 360 as metaphor for reportorial experience. Lots of work
to be done to make this functional, better quality. Upside: no need
to shoot as many shots to get all the action. You could offer two
paths, allowing for an unmediated experience, with the addition
of hotspots (links in the video) to provide interactivity. Downsides:
you need an interesting shot in 360. Ideally you have at least two
interesting things and you are between them. Must haul extra equipment.
Loss of focus--360 could broaden context too much.
Technical: Preplanning is key. Issues: when you
use a fish eye two shots are needed to create one 360-degree image,
which has ethical implications, because you have to take them at
different times. This is how it's done now in 35mm: lots of shots,
quicktime VR, ethical implications, altered image. This is no good
for action situation, only landscapes, because you can't have things
move while you set up the second shot. Are you in the photo or not?
If not how do you take it? Robot? Beanie? How do you see what's
going on behind you? How do we tell people the 360-degree function
even exists so they will use it.
Audience: Allows journalists to explain what journalistic
choices have been made. Why we make the decisions we do to take
the pictures we do, cover the situations we do. It breaks down the
us/them dichotomy. The audience can tell more about the credibility
of news organization.
Education: Use a 360-camera to show journalists
in action, give students the experience of an entire situation they
might find themselves in.
Ethics: Issues of photo manipulation arise; also
need for permissions--people may not know they are on camera. Who
teaches this? Teacher training is needed. Let students know this
may not be reality for a long time. Impact on newsroom: Adding to
existing job requirements. Journalists will not thank us. Who takes
images: solo reporters? Teams? Photojournalists? Reporters? Both?
Training on equipment, how to report with it. If everyone is required
to do it, quality won't be high enough. Union issues.
Research: If you put the journalist into the picture
in some way, what would audience think of this? If they see us and
see what we're doing, the audience could better understand what
is involved. You may not need a reporter on camera, can provide
information in text or track. If the user doesn't navigate should
they see a director's cut? Do audiences want more than passive visuals,
to be able to drive? In terms of technology, need to develop one
camera that can take 360-degree photos, regular shots, panoramas,
and video.
3-D PHOTOGRAPHY AND VIDEO
Uses: Illustrative or explanatory journalism,
to show what it's like in the field (eg: mountains and caves in
Afghanistan). The technology lends itself to experiential journalism.
It provides emotional access--connects people to the world, providing
more sensory information. The technology is not ready for prime
time. Needs to lose the goggles, need to synch everything including
zooms. Could you switch a monitor from 2-D to 3-D? Need one camera
so it would be less cumbersome than shooting with two at the same
time. Issues include need for high bandwidth, seamless software.
Users could submit their own 3-D elements for stories. 3-D forces
outside of news will be adopting this, especially the gaming industry.
It would be great to add this to 360 goggles, and add directional
audio. Might as well put it all in there. Audience impact: 2-D gives
a distance, but 3-D would bring people in closer. This could have
good or bad implications. 2-D offers a level of protection, 3-D
thrusts you into it. Would need to label what you're doing because
people could be upset by graphic images. In coverage of disasters,
for example, there would be no separation. But it could also create
a sense of community.
Newsroom: Training needed. Still need good craft.
Similar to the transition from darkroom to Photoshop.
Education: Anything to keep them awake! Imagine
a mockup of a scene to train students to observe, and report before
going out in the field. Or bring it back and let them see what they
missed.
Research: 3-D changes perception of information.
What is the best way to view it? Accessibility issues (some people
can't see it). The news industry should be prepared for a generation
coming in that is 3-D savvy. This is really the only technology
not yet in use by news media. Will people begin to accept this as
reality? You are creating that impression when it is not the case.
Are you distorting, lying, by using this? Will the audience be harmed
by it?
FUTURE TECHNOLOGY
Thirty years from now: Device becomes a non-existent issue. It's
about uses, not tools. "Everything from anywhere." We won't think
about the tools any more than we think about the telephone, or the
pipe sending the water to the fountain.
Issues: Convenience; portability; manipulability
(what can you do with it); collection is ubiquitous (maybe everything
is monitored, a Web cam on every lamppost, a camera in every phone,
so how many reporters do you need to send in the field?) Control
of news events becomes like sports events now. War coverage might
be only on CNN because they own the rights. Dissemination may be
more artificial intelligence or more people, not clear. Also not
clear whether content will be more or less important than distribution.
But we still need journalists as filters, helping to take data and
information and produce knowledge.
Ten years from now, imagine these scenarios and roles, a kind of
information food chain:
1. Information collector. A 15 year old girl. I walk around with
a device that inputs audio, video and text, indexes it, and pumps
it out. I get paid a small amount of money for walking around. I
have GPS on my device. I collect weather data. I get small micropayments
to give it up to wholesalers.
2. Information broker. Images as property have become more important.
Being at the right place at the right time is what matters. Ordinary
people are taking winning pictures. I am a small company looking
for hot new properties and pulling them down. I take it in raw form
and package it as stories. I can buy information on an Ebay-type
service in the hope I can turn around and sell it to distributors.
On a good day, there might be 5-6 views of the same thing which
I can cut together to produce a package that will sell.
3. Publisher/editor of leftist publication. I am okay with links
to NGOs which become news gatherers. They go to demonstrations and
government meetings. I need contact with information brokers I can
buy stuff from. I need talented writers, editors, packagers and
reporters. Essentials that I provide include speed and analysis.
I don't spend money dispatching people to scenes. I use off the
shelf software for computer assisted reporting, powerful sifting
of databases most important. I will pay for investigative work.
4. Re-publisher. My Web site and I have become one and the same.
I don't go out much. I sit in front of my screen. People are into
republishing. We started with data, then information, then knowledge.
Some of us got to wisdom. It's fashionable to say, "I'm in
information." News was about hierarchy, now it's about collaboration.
It's all about creating knowledge. I sit here sifting. Being a finder
is just as important as being a writer. Information comes in minimal
units. Cut and paste is where I began and what I'm still doing.
I use Newsblaster to lay out whole spectrum so I can cut and paste.
It's really just a matter of figuring out what to do with it once
I got it.
5. Communicator. I talk with friends and family all day through
hand held devices or even my refrigerator. When something happens
I almost always hear about it first from one of my friends.
6. Game mod. I get news on my handheld. I send news that ways too.
When you file a news story a Web bot will pick it up and add it
to next news cycle. I make more depending on viewership, and I can
tell how I'm doing by watching the pocket logo on the anchor, which
changes depending on how many people are checking the news.
|
