The First Incarnation of the KU-Tube

| | Comments (3)

So KUJH has finally made the leap from posting video on its own website to posting video on the most popular video-hosting site in the world. Sounds great, right? In a refreshing vacation from my usual default setting of lukewarm cynicism, I actually do think this is a great idea. At least, I don't really see any negatives to the move. I mean, that's something, right?

KUTubefuture.jpgThe future of KUTube?
Photo: KUJH TV
Of course, while the absence of negative doesn't necessarily predict the presence of positive, I do think there are plenty of potential pluses to be procured from the placement of our product on YouTube. There's the potential for increased traffic; if a "YouTuber" stumbles upon one of our videos, there's a decent chance they'll be drawn to our website to find more. Potential employers may catch a glimpse of one of our anchors in action, and decide they're just the fresh face to save their failing newscast.

As was mentioned in class today, YouTube allows for comments and ratings on our videos, providing a means for viewers to interact and provide feedback. While any YouTube comments and ratings should obviously be taken with a grain of salt, the added element of even limited interactivity (there's that word again) is worthy addition to the KUJH product.

There's also the possibility that one of our videos becomes a viral sensation, which could dramatically increase our visibility amongst our target audience(s). Of course, this could also be seen as a potential negative, as the most likely recipient of viral fame would likely be some sort of "blooper" reel, where an anchor or reporter makes a series of gaffes hilarious enough to warrant the 3 seconds it would take a viewer to forward the video to friends. Honestly, though, I think any possible YouTube fame we can acquire would adhere to that old industry proverb, "Any publicity is good publicity."

3 Comments

Your blog raises the question: Should the producers be scanning the outtakes for good bloopers. This is part of the semi-serious "hot blonde" discussion. Hot blonde makes flu mist bloopers?

What might also be interesting to explore are paid content sites or channels like Veoh, BrightCove, and Blip.tv. Not a lot of $$ but you do get additional exposure.

I think scanning for bloopers could be a good idea. Of course, publishing those bloopers raises some issues, but it's definitely a possibility worth exploring. Also, on Simran's point, I think exploring any site that could improve our exposure would be a worthy venture.

One of the ideas that immediately sprung to my mind (and several other people's, I'm sure) when we were discussing ways to increase exposure is to create a Facebook application for KUJH. The Kansan already has one for it's Free-for-all, I believe. It'd be interesting to see if Brian knows how to do this, because I think it would be a very worthwhile project.

As we briefly discussed in class, the "hot blonde" topic raises the important question of where the line exists between increasing exposure and decreasing credibility. While I have little doubt that labeling stories with "hot blonde" or "young coed" would dramatically increase our views, I feel it would reflect poorly on KUJH. However, it is important for us to explore other ways to increase hits on YouTube and other search engines. Sam brought this up when he suggested we explore search engine optimization techniques, which I think would definitely be a valuable topic taught to future students in the j-school.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Christopher Raine published on October 31, 2007 11:57 AM.

Hail to old KU(tube) was the previous entry in this blog.

Soon to be: 'Must see' KUJH-TV is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.