Paul Sweeting is the editor of ContentAgenda.com and a columnist for Video Business. He has covered the home entertainment industries since 1985 for Billboard, Variety, Publishers Weekly and other leading business publications. He is based in Washington, DC.
Link This | Email this | Comments (0) | Digg This | Slashdot This | add to Del.icio.us
[Digital Home] [E-Content] [Streams & Downloads]
Link This | Email this | Comments (0) | Digg This | Slashdot This | add to Del.icio.us
[Consumer Trends] [Digital Copyright] [DRM] [Legal]
Link This | Email this | Comments (1) | Digg This | Slashdot This | add to Del.icio.us
[Consumer Trends] [E-Content] [Platforms & Formats] [Streams & Downloads]
As a web video producer myself, I'm finding myself having to realign the way I think about the content I'm providing. After all, narrative pictures are simply a medium for story, so enabling users to use story seems to be the holy grail. However, I'm filled with problems and doubts. Aren't stories inherently interactive? How can I enable a user to "use" a story? I'm reminded of those grade-school assignments where students are asked to analyze a book the class has read. Surely the solutions must not be so academic? So I've found myself focusing instead on the controlling idea of the stories I'm telling and thinking about how to tie in web content so when a user finishes watching the video, they're compelled to action beyond the video. In a way, the story and web resources are irrevocably tied, enabling a movement towards change in a user's life. For example, a romantic comedy about two deaf lovers could be the core of a "deaf persons dating site." In this train of thought, however, I'm having trouble keeping the focus on the video content, instead of the video content simply being an intro to some other media on the site. But am I missing the point? Isn't Google simply an expressway to other content, should I see my video content as simply a way of spurring people into the world with newfound focus? It's extremely confusing.