What is this? Amatuer Hour?

Through my days in Journalism I've learned that nothing is better than video to tell a story. You combine that with a voice over the video and you've got yourself the news version of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

So, when the idea of pairing video with newspaper editorials came about it was like watching Rahul Sharma walk around the newsroom. There was no way it could be unsuccessful.

Problem is the video editorials I've seen aren't all that successful and the reason for that is simple. The newspaper reporters never bothered to learn how to operate a camera.

I watch the editorials and I'm just screaming at the screen, "No, stop zooming! Stop panning! Is this reporter jumping up and down?"

I learned early on in journalism that bad video makes Uncle Rick pull his hair out.
Photo courtesy: R. Steve Dick, KU University Relations

There is a fine line between making video that helps your story and making video that detracts from your story. As a person who gets paid to operate a camera I watch videos like the ones from the Dayton Daily News and I feel like I'm being tortured. It's death by shaky video.

I've been on boats in the ocean that produced less sickness than some newspaper editorials and it's a real problem. This type of amatuer video draws readers away from the story and more importantly it draws credibility away from the story. When I can't tell the difference between a serious news editorial and a Bentley Green music video. Why should I watch the news editorial?

I'm not giving up on video editorials. I still think it's the wave of the future. The idea of including video behind a quality journalist opinion should lead to increased readership for all newspapers. Someone just needs to introduce the reporters to a tripod and level ground. If nobody else volunteers for the job I'll go around and do it myself for free. Anything to keep my sanity.