There has been ample discussion as to the showing of the Virginia Tech killer’s “multimedia manifesto.” Those who appose it being shown say, “I just hate that a lot of people not used to seeing that type of image had to see it.“ That’s a quote from Virginia State Police Col. Steve Flaherty. Those who are in favor of the manifesto being shown claim the obligation of journalists. “When they have news value, we have an obligation to show them,” ABC News Senior VP Jeffrey Schneider said.

With that said, it seems we can make everyone happy. Had the networks just put the video online, they can fulfill their obligation and not offend or disturb those who do not wish to see the video over and over again. Was this ever a thought? If so what are the reasons for not doing this?

I do have one pending question NBC continues to contend that they had a journalistic obligation to show the video and to make it available to the public. That I agree with. How then can they turn around and say, there are parts that are so horrific that they “will never see the light of day?” You comments are welcome on this.

Jeff Jarvis’ take.

(First off, don’t you love the use of the Cavuto mark?) I’m not sure how I missed this in February, but a study by Borrell Associates found that newspapers are making more money off online video than TV stations.
From a MarketWatch blog:

The media research firm found that newspapers are making more money from online video advertising than local TV stations, $81 million to $32 million – almost 3 to 1. In each of three markets, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York, local advertisers spent more than $5 million for streaming video commercials.

This reminds me of a recent conversation on LostRemote.com where TV folks were upset that the blog was featuring more and more innovating things that newspapers are doing versus TV stations. The problem is most TV stations aren’t doing innovative things online. My best guess as to why is because most TV stations want all their online video to have the same production value as the video that goes on the broadcast show. Compare that to newspapers that are realizing the long tail and are working to get as much video up as possible. Or maybe newspapers are better at sending out press releases. OK fine I’ll admit, I’m now biased.

Thanks to Lucas Grindley for pointing it out in his post on how the Netflix move to “Watch Now” is a Sign of the Times (see I can still use TV brands).

As some of you know I tried out to be the student graduation speaker…didn’t make it. So I figured I subject everyone to my corny speech here. Let me know what you think. (Speech follows after the break.)
Read the rest of this entry »