Want to watch a German polar bear play? It's on YouTube. Want to see people sing about milk and cereal? It's on YouTube. Missed last night's KUJH-TV broadcast? Now, it's on YouTube. Apparently, everything is on YouTube; we might as well add KUJH to the repertoire.
Honestly, the might-as-well mentality is appropriate. We have nothing to lose by posting the broadcasts on YouTube. Acquiring an account is free. Posting is simple and requires little time, which afternoon producers have extra of. Posting to YouTube isn't going to tarnish our reputation. We're a college news station; we're expected to be innovative. We should reach our viewers where they are. And college students are on YouTube. I haven't had access to the stats, but I'm willing to bet that very few people access the videos on our Web site. Consequently, we desperately need to bring attention to the online versions of our broadcasts. Even if few people access KUJH on YouTube, that's exposure to a few people we wouldn't get otherwise.
We don't have anything to lose, but do we have anything to gain by posting to YouTube? When I log onto YouTube, I want to be entertained. I'm not going to watch a serious news program amidst my quest for laughs. Similarly, when I want the latest on campus and Lawrence news, I don't think about going to YouTube. By posting on YouTube, we prove that we're up-to-date with the latest journalistic trends, but who are we proving this to if no one is watching KUJH on YouTube?
Maybe we are reaching people; I was surprised to see our most viewed video on YouTube has 72 views. It's nothing compared to the 3,167,160 views my favorite vlogger got on his most viewed post, but i72 views in three days is not too shabby. How many of these views came from the newsroom?
YouTube may not be the best way of reaching students. Converging with other campus media may be more effective. I'm biased, but The University Daily Kansan is the first medium that comes to mind. I haven't checked the stats on kansan.com traffic, but I'm also willing to bet it doesn't get much traffic either. Pairing up the two mediums on one Web site would allow print and broadcast reporters to collaborate on stories. Reporters from both mediums could share story ideas and create stories with different angles and package them together on one Web site. Web producers could create web extras, such as slideshows, graphs and illustrations to post with the multimedia packages.
So, to YouTube or not to YouTube? Might as well YouTube.