How can internet videos be used in science communication and science journalism?
I come from a time when the only way to have a video presented to the public was to convince a TV executive to broadcast your project (and pray not to be given the 4am time slot) or to invite friends to your house and play whatever you’ve produced on the VCR.
Being from that time, I worked on TV for a few years and then decided to be a print journalist, a term that doesn’t make a lot of sense today as most of my stories are published in websites and never printed.
But being a “words journalist” today makes no sense any more. If I’m writing a story for a website, what prevents me from using pictures, audio or video, when it is for the benefit of the story?
(In fact, nothing prevents me, that’s why I’m planning to change that)
And what is people doing in that direction? I’ve looked at New Scientist, BBC and Reuters websites. Apart from these, who else is using videos on science journalism? Or science communication?
What do you think about these initiatives? Do you click on the videos, or you think it’s just hype and focus on the text and pictures?
And, if I may add a question, would people like to see videos on Nature Network? e.g. would you see yourself using them in blog posts?
The problem with videos is that they set the pace. When I’m busy (which is all the time), and I want to skim a story then it’s a lot easier to zip through text and pictures than to have to watch a video. And I’d have to wear headphones as well so as not to disturb everyone else.
Having said that, vodcasts are useful for the train.
Matt – I would certainly like to be able to embed vidoes from YouTube etc. into a NN blog post. There have been several times I’ve wanted to use one to demonstrate something and haven’t been able to.
I’d like to see space for embedding pics into NN posts directly, without having to fart around with other servers.
Videos are special cases of that.
Absolutely Matt. Where do I sign/send a cheque to??
Matt: yes. As Brian and Richard, I’d also like to be able to embed videos and pics directly.
Richard: I agree with your point. Some days I’m just not in the mood for video or audio because I don’t want to wait for things to unfold – I thought I was the only one…
By the way, suggestion accepted – videos can be good for the train. I’ll keep that in mind. Any preferences?
Preferences? Do you mean content or format?
I have a shiny black iPod that doesn’t get enough use, if that’s what you mean :)
videos can be good for the train. I’ll keep that in mind. Any preferences?
Yeah, the best thing to come out of Edinburgh !! The train to Glasgow ;-)
—
SciVEE and JoVE
By preferences I meant what kind of programme you would like to watch on the train – a round up of news, interviews, comedy, round tables, etc etc etc
I think this is definitely a growth area. For many sciences the use of moving images are a great way to enhance understanding. This is certainly true of structural biology (my own field), though it’s rare to see it done well. Part of the problem is that it’s difficult to generate high-quality content; something I’d like to work on if there were 6 more hours in the day…
If you’re looking for scientific vodcasts (and podcasts) – have you tried iTunesU ? I’ve listened to a couple of lectures from MIT and Berkeley – both excellent. Can’t speak for the video content but worth a look I should say.
I agree that video is increasing in use. There is even a DIUS Youtube channel now.
I was interested to note on the Guardian website in their stories about world food a week or two back that they included some short videos.
I too agree with Richard’s point about viewing videos not always being convenient. Perhaps that’s a generation thing, I don’t know. I usually want to skim some text before deciding whether to view.
Searching for video and audio is also an issue – currently only works if there is some text or tags to go with it.
Although not strictly science journalism/communication (in the sense of conveying scientific ideas to non-scientists), we at Nature Protocols actively encourage our authors to make use of our ability to host videos. We have found that videos can be extremely useful for visualising particularly tricky techniques; we include the videos as Supplementary Information (all SI can be viewed without a subscription/site license) alongside the published protocol, but we also highlight some here.
We are working to improve this aspect of our site and are keen to obtain feedback and ideas from readers on how we could better meet their protocol needs – contact us a protocols@nature.com!
As Graham has already mentioned above, JoVE is another really useful site, which hosts ‘standalone’ videos of protocols (in contrast, Nature Protocols videos aim to enhance, rather than replace, an associated ‘print’ version of the protocol).
Returning to the general question of embedding videos: I follow a lot of blogs and it is very common now for people to embed videos, podcasts and various other things into their posts. However, I scan all these blogs using an rss reader (google reader, and before that, Bloglines), and quite often there is some kind of incompatibility and the reader crashes. Another issue is the slowness of loading up when one goes to a blog/post that has video or widget in it.
Personally, I do not read videos or listen to podcasts (or watch TV) because life is too busy and short, and I’d rather read. I look at a screen most of the day at work. I think videos do have uses, of course, particularly for describing research. My main caveat is the damage they do to connection speeds and one’s speed of reading of the blog.
Great discussion folks, keep the comments and links coming :)
One of the comments I picked up from the 2008 North Carolina Science Blogging Conference was in relation to embedded videos.
When I embed videos in my blog posts, I always ensure that they don’t open automatically when folks are browsing. It can be quite annoying if you’re simply surfing and you’re “forced” to watch a video that you ain’t even clicked on.
As Maxine says, and depending on ones connection speed, videos can slow you’re browsing speed if not correctly embedded.
Great news about SI videos at N Protocols Dot !!
Has anyone actually used SciVEE? Does it add so much to have the author talk through the paper? I’d be interested to hear people’s experience but I think I would rather just read the paper myself.
To me the appeal of video is its potential for enhancing the experience beyond what can be put across on the written page. Videos of protocols (JoVE or Nature Protocols) make more sense to me. Or it could be a good way to try to explain a paper or a new piece of science to a wider audience. This would involve re-working the material for a non-specialist audience which I appreciate is a non-trivial exercise. There are some good examples in TV documentaries (and some execrable ones!), though one wouldn’t need to aim for such high production values, as long as there was clarity and enthusiasm! Nor would pieces need to be very long – indeed, bite-sized chunks would be more palatable to the YouTube generation…
The last (kind of) science video I watched online was a Mentos and cola explosion on YouTube. Ages ago.
I completely agree with Barbara that there is nothing to stop anyone from presenting a story in a variety of media, but I’m not going to sit through a video if it doesn’t give me anything more than the words would i.e. I want some flashes, bangs or really compelling pictures. Science should be good for this (theoretical disciplines excepted I suppose…) so I’m surprised that we don’t see more of them.
I disagree, Stephen. Strongly.
Production values make all the difference. It has to be professional (for example, one of the reasons I stopped listening to the Nature podcast — sorry guys, but this is for real — is that half of the interviewed correspondents sounded like they were at the bottom of a well. Not only is that ruddy annoying in itself, it meant I had to keep jiggling the volume on the iPod throughout the entire cast. Life’s too short for mediocrity), otherwise people will switch off.
@Richard: Production values make all the difference
Morning! Oh I certainly agree with you that a high standard of technical production is necessary – I am a big fan of Quality... ;-)
I guess I what I meant to say was that you don’t need to have totally slick presentation, cross-cuts of a presenter who starts a sentence on one continent and finishes it off on another – that sort of thing. But it does have to be audible/watchable and the technology to achieve a decent standard is getting more accessible all the time.
Yes Stephen (evening!) – there is a world of difference between ‘slick’ and ‘professional’. One is marketeering, the other plain old-fashioned attention to detail.
Here’s an interesting example of the use of video on a blog – a scientist gives a frank account of a grant rejection.