K
kyscott
Guest
When did television stations and national networks start broadcasting "video" from Youtube?! I remember there was at one time, standards to be met for video to be broadcast.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
kyscott said:
Because it is so much cheaper and easier than if they had to track down a broadcast-quality copy (which is not available for many YouTube videos).
Most of what is on YouTube is uploads someone recorded off of television anyway. The networks are aiding something they are trying to fight...illegal copying of copyrighted material.
YouTube is embedded in today's world as coffee and cars are. We are in the Internet age now.
I guess it's kind of similar to TV news channels pulling pictures of people in the news from their MySpace profiles. Kind of lame if you ask me, but as pointed out it's easy and cheap.
K
kyscott
Guest
I guess in other words, we are gonna bring everything down to the level of Youtube instead of raising it up to the level that broadcast television used to be.
I wouldn't blame TV news for this phenomenon. More people are watching video online and fewer are watching it on TV. The stations are trying to cut their losses by providing the content people are watching online. They also realize the internet has made people far more accepting of less than "broadcast quality" video. That means stations know they can choose to air good content with less than perfect video over poorer content with perfect video. There are some times when the video that makes air is just too poor in quality.. but it's rare.
Bottom line: You want to blame someone for this, look in the mirror. Personally, I have no problem with it at all.
Bottom line: You want to blame someone for this, look in the mirror. Personally, I have no problem with it at all.
K
kyscott
Guest
tested said:
That's odd, when I look in the mirror I see a person wanting to preserve the quality and standards that television used to have, not broadcasting questionable video with low resolution. And I'm sure you don't have a problem with it, quality and standards are lost on this new generation of "broadcasters".
tested said:
A broadcast trade website recently profiled some local news operations covering stories using Flip Video cameras. Aside from some lighting, the demonstrated videos of their packaged stories didn't look half bad. The reporters apparently like them because of their portability (no need to tow a photog along) and the fact that they're much less intimidating to interviewees.
K
kyscott
Guest
Ironic how video is going to crap in the dawning of the age of high definition. I have seen the video off of the smaller cameras like the digital 8mm and such. that is pretty good video for it's size and looks better than the choked off definition of youtube video.
I can imagine 10 years ago broadcasters whould of run crappy Realvideo news footage.But now they will get any footage if posible for a breaking news story.Today broadcasters will take any quality video and probably even a FisherPrice PXL 2000 pixelvision cassette camcorder.
- Status