Anne Saul is news systems editor for Gannett U.S. Community Publishing and is in charge of the division’s video training program. In two years, the program has trained more than 650 newspaper reporters and photographers to shoot and edit video stories for the Web. Another 180 Gannett staffers have been trained under a similar program at the company’s UK Newsquest subsidiary. Gannett’s video training program is unique in that it is immersive, lasts three to five days, and participants are equipped with higher-end cameras and editing software. The focus: To produce quality video stories. Saul answered questions posed by Newspapers & Technology Associate Editor Marcelo Duran.

Newspapers & Technology: What trends do you see emerging for online news video?

Anne Saul: Video is one of the fastest growing areas online. The YouTube phenomenon is obvious, but recent studies are telling us that news video is growing in importance and popularity.

A recent Horowitz Associates report said that news and user-generated video are the most often viewed genres (in that order). Similar reports from Pew and Advertising.com 2007 back up the interest in news video — and particularly video from trusted sites. It’s like anything else on the Web; people really do want context and help understanding information and issues.

The expansion of higher speed delivery will allow customers to view high definition video on large high-end monitors. Verizon is investing billions of dollars in expanding its fiber-based high-speed network in the 28 states in which it provides service. (No doubt other providers will do the same.) No longer will viewers be limited to watching videos online in 4-by-3-inch windows.

N&T: What are some of Gannett’s goals for online video?

Saul: Our goal is to provide quality video stories online that, quite frankly, can compete with television. Despite depleting resources, we still have more reporting expertise than local television stations.

The only obstacle that has held us back is an inability to tell stories with video. At Gannett, we now have staffers at 78 U.S. daily newspapers and 19 U.K. news centers capable of producing video stories. In time, we can be very competitive — and in some markets, we already are. We also want to expand the viewers’ understanding of news and issues by providing news and information in many formats — including video — where appropriate. And, of course, we want to provide our advertisers with new venues to help them grow their businesses — and ours. 

N&T: Can newspapers make money from their online video efforts?

Saul: Absolutely. We conducted a couple of training sessions for advertising staffers from several of our newspapers late last year. In one session the trainees sold all eight advertising pre-roll spots by the end of the three-day training session. The issue isn’t whether we can sell advertising; it’s having enough sustainable traffic from news videos to support the advertising.

N&T: How much of a financial commitment is Gannett making to newspaper video efforts?

Saul: So far, we have invested more than $2.25 million in equipment alone. That’s in addition to the cost, travel, etc., of conducting more than 40 regional training sessions in the U.S. and the U.K. Yes, it’s a lot of money  — particularly in the current economic environment, but this is about investing in our future and where we believe we can grow our content and our revenue.

N&T: What have been your biggest challenges and achievements so far?

Saul: When we started our training in March 2006, the total video traffic for all Gannett community newspapers, excluding USA Today, was 3,700 streams for the month. In February 2008, our newspapers achieved almost 2 million video streams.

The biggest challenges are maintaining the production level with fewer resources. It takes time to become proficient at creating video stories, but it’s difficult for editors to provide that time when they have fewer people and more demands to provide news and information online.

N&T: Why did Gannett decide to invest in high-end video equipment for its online newspaper operations and what are some of the short-term and long-term benefits?

Saul: We believe that you need quality equipment and training to produce quality video. Low-end $400 video cameras are not capable of producing quality audio — in fact, they produce quite dreadful audio. Audio is as important — if not more important — than video. Audio provides the story; video enhances it.

For the short term, we want to be able to compete with television; we can do that with quality video stories. For the long term, we are positioning ourselves for the day when viewers can see our video in high-definition and on large screens. We couldn’t do that if we were using low-end equipment. Viewers will accept poor quality video when that’s all that’s available; the Virginia Tech shooting video is a good example. But they won’t accept that level of quality as the norm.

N&T: What are some of the benefits of using shorter-length video?

Saul: Viewers won’t watch long videos on the Web — unless they are TV reruns, of course. We’ve found that news video viewers usually start tuning out after 90 seconds or so.

N&T: How has video coverage changed over the past few years for newspaper Web sites?

Saul: Well, there wasn’t much video on newspaper Web sites even a couple of years ago. So, the growth has been significant. In addition to staff-produced video stories, we now are able to receive reader-submitted videos — which can significantly contribute to our ability to cover breaking news. Again, the Virginia Tech shooting incident is a good example; so is user-submitted video from tornadoes, floods and hurricanes. Like photo galleries, viewers can’t get enough of the images of devastation.

N&T: Will providing more online video help attract a younger audience?

Saul: I think it will. The younger generation already is hooked on YouTube; many have their own equipment and produce their own video. Quality aside, they understand the value of video — certainly as a form of entertainment.

But I think they also expect that there will be video of a highly visual event — such as the crane that collapsed in New York, the tornado that hit downtown Atlanta, etc. Someone is going to get that video — why shouldn’t it be the newspaper?

N&T: What are some of the benefits of partnering with online video companies such as Maven and thePlatform?

Saul: Maven/thePlatform will provide our newspapers and TV stations with the ability to provide video stories more ubiquitously throughout our Web sites — on section fronts, with stories, rather than just in a video silo. It also will allow our news operations, community newspapers, TV stations, USA Today, to share more video stories. And it will allow us to receive and publish reader-submitted videos.

N&T: What are some of the issues facing newspapers when it comes to providing quality online video?

Saul: I fear that too many newspapers are excusing themselves from producing quality online video because it’s too foreign to our print background/roots. A video trainer at one of the nation’s largest newspapers told me he didn’t think reporters could handle high-end cameras and sophisticated editing software. I disagree.

Most of the journalists we have trained have been reporters; they are smart people and catch on quickly. In fact, two of them are now working at our TV stations.

It takes time to produce quality video stories. But like any new technology, the more reporters and photographers use it, the more proficient they become. That requires dedication of resources up front, which is very tough in these times. But we can’t focus on plugging the holes in the dam; we have to focus on growing our future.