Interviews: Video is King
by Jaclyn Schiff on 04/20/09 at 10:32 pm
I’m surprised that this post is coming from me. The truth is, I rarely watch online video clips, definitely fewer than the average person. On most days, I probably don’t watch anything online. But lately, I have been making time to check out the interviews on Jun Loayza’s Viralogy blog.
From the day Jun launched this blog, I was hooked. Posts often feature Jun interviewing another blogger about his or her blog, the blog content, personal aspirations and other topics. Jun’s concept works so well because he’s helping readers and bloggers connect beyond the text. This interests almost all blog readers, which is why the “About” page is often one of the most viewed pages on a blog.
Each time I watch one of Jun’s interviews I think about how this probably wouldn’t work as well in text. The same is basically true for almost any blogger who wants to feature an interview in a blog post. Video works better than print. Here’s why:
Conventional Q&A’s Aren’t Compelling
Bloggers love posting Q&A’s because it’s easy to create this content. You shoot off a bunch of questions to an interview subject and he or she e-mails you back. Copy, paste, publish and you’re done. The person you’ve selected to interview might be somewhat interesting and have some insightful things to say, but you’ll probably won’t elicit brilliant must-read answers by using this method.
Interviews Usually Don’t Provide New Information
Social media makes everyone more accessible, so if I had a burning question for the person you’re interviewing, I could send them a message, tweet, e-mail or IM. I’m probably less likely to schedule a video chat with someone I hardly know. But there’s a lot of non-verbal communication that goes on when you see a person on a video and that information helps you develop an impression of what the person is actually like.
Interviews are Valuable as Part of a Larger Undertaking
Text interviews are much more compelling to read with analysis, context and responses. Perhaps your interview subject gave you an interesting answer, you’re much more likely to write memorable content if you provide even more than just that interesting answer. Did someone contradict that answer? Why is it interesting or unusual? Interviews in the context of an article are more interesting than if they stand alone.
Sure, other factors are involved in making the content compelling. Jun basically started the blog with a pre-existing community because most (if not all) of the featured bloggers are from the Gen. Y / BrazenCareerist.com community, so there’s a pre-existing curiosity about learning more about people whose names you recognize. Chuck Westbrook’s experience also highlights the importance of community. Chuck recently refocused his blog project and openly blogged about what was working and what wasn’t, commenters pointed out that the bloggers Chuck profiled didn’t have a lot in common–the community ties were weak.
Of course, it also goes without saying that some people come across a lot better in print that on video. But for those who can pull it off, video wins hands down when it comes to interviews.
Angela
Apr 20th, 2009
I have a confession to make: I rarely read interview posts. I skim them, but I rarely actually read them. For some reason it just seems harder to get the information out of interview posts. Probably for the very reason you mentioned – they aren’t very compelling (usually.)
I agree that if you can pull it off, a video interview is the way to go. Even audio can be good. The conversation aspect of it is what makes it so much more interesting. Like you said, even a text interview with analysis or counter arguments is more compelling.
The only thing about video is short is usually better (as a viewer)- 10 minutes tops unless you’re a superstar!
Dan Miranda
Apr 21st, 2009
Jun does those videos right for sure. I feel like I constantly want new content (or videos) from him because he throws out such quality content. Video blogging is the future.
Jun Loayza
Apr 21st, 2009
Hey Jaclyn,
Thanks so much for the compliment. It makes me very happy to hear that you take the time to watch my video interviews with bloggers.
The reason I started Awesome Revolution is because we all read each others words, but we’ve never actually seen each other say them. You get a completely different view and feel from a blogger when you see them talking rather than just reading their writing.
It has definitely helped that I’ve leveraged the community I’ve built through Brazen Careerist. I think it’s going to be very cool when I start branching out to bloggers that we’ve all never heard of before.
Big things to come!
Ryan Stephens
Apr 21st, 2009
I agreed with everything you’ve written here. The best part about video interviews for me is that you really get to see someone’s personality come through.
The only problem with video is just that they’re usually long. It’s rare I have 15+ minutes to sit down and watch a video in a day. I think that’s where Jun separates himself from other people that do video interviews. He gives me the breakdown in text below. He does the hard work on his end so that I can watch the parts I want and skim the text for the parts I don’t have time to catch.
Maybe mixing both mediums is the key?
R
Jaclyn Schiff
Apr 21st, 2009
Ryan, I definitely agree about the length. I think that is part of what generally puts me off online video clips. I also like how Jun breaks down the conversation, it’s a good mix.
Holly Hoffman
Apr 21st, 2009
I hate to say this, but I’m not a fan of video or podcasts. I do a lot of my online reading at work, as so many of the general population does, and all that audio going on doesn’t allow for conspicuousness.
I also suffer from skim-itis. I can’t skim through a podcast or a video picking up the key points.
I haven’t sat through any of Jun’s videos (sorry, Jun!). I respect his work, but it’s simply not my medium. I’m like too many of my type – too ADD to sit through them will full attention. I want to skip & skim and decide what’s important for me.
I do agree, though, that written (or print, as you call them) Q&As are dull. There’s got to be a better way. As we continue to evolve media in this new world, we’re going to have to play with it until we find what works. I like when bloggers combine video with written stuff. Then I can choose – do I want to read the synopsis/ highlights/ summary/ direct transcription or watch the more entertaining video? It also lets me decide at a glance whether or not the video is worth watching.
I think we don’t read Q&As because we are used to being able to participate. We want to interact with the blogger ourselves. I think that’s why Jun’s open call for questions on Twitter are so great. Why not take that a step further and host a Q&A with participants and post a transcript, or the audio, or whatever?
I think you’re bringing up a great point here – what can we improve upon?
Jaclyn Schiff
Apr 21st, 2009
Holly, great feedback, lots of good points!
Video alone definitely won’t satisfy everyone, so I like your and Ryan’s point about having both in some combination. But when I say both, I don’t mean post a transcript . If you’re CNN then, yeah post a transcript, video and get the anchor to write a blog post or whatever. But if you’re a lone blogger, then I think text with highlights (like what Jun does!) works better. The goal of text when accompanying a video should be to make you want to watch it, or give you the most valuable information.
Another thing I’ve been thinking about is whether just any blogger should do interviews, and when I think about what sort of interviews I like to watch/read on blogs, they’re generally on blogs that exclusively feature interviews or offer it as a regular feature. There’s a huge difference between bloggers who focus on creating great interview content and bloggers who use interviews and content fillers.
Jamie
Apr 21st, 2009
I never read interview posts and I was just thinking about this the other day, because I know people take the time to answer those questions. And then I feel like no one reads them.
I like video. It really makes blogging more personalized. And ditches this whole idea that we have an online life and an offline life. They become quite mashed up when video gets involved.
Anyways – enjoyed the post! Hopefully more people will venture into video. =)
When are you going to be interviewed by Jun!?
Jaclyn Schiff
Apr 21st, 2009
Jamie, thanks for commenting! Love getting a visit from an Internet celebrity
When it comes to blogging, I think video works well for interviews, but I’m not sure it’s equally as good for monologues. Some people do this well, like Ryan Stephens (above). But I think it’s hard for one person to be as engaging.
Jun and I have talked and I’ll be interviewing with him soon – sometime next month, I’m sure!
Chuck
Apr 21st, 2009
I’m with Holly on this one. Video is best for me when it comes in short bursts or is produced in such a way to capture my interest and hold it tightly. In general, I prefer text, but I do like seeing faces and hearing voices when it’s someone I’ve read or heard about for awhile.
A transcript of an interview can be interesting, but it can be dull as well. Context and content play a big role there.
Susan
Apr 21st, 2009
For those who are reading blogs at work, I can see how video might not work. But in theory it’s a great way to draw readers in and capture the subject’s personality and mannerisms (you’ll often see descriptions of hand gestures or posture in a profile, but never in a Q & A format). I just had to film a video for a web article I’m working on. Now that I know how to do it, I might be more inclined to include video on my own blog. But I will say that it’s hard to do it well.
Jaclyn Schiff
Apr 25th, 2009
Video is hard to do well, and I imagine that it’s more time-consuming than regular blogging.
Susan, I’d love to see a post from you about how often video comes up with your clients and whether you think freelance writers should offer video services. Or is it more worthwhile to focus on the writing and simply refer clients to video producers?
mewcomm
Apr 27th, 2009
Ms Schiff:
I am of the view that the future (present) belongs to the Renaissance journalist. That is to say one that offers multi-format / multi-platform content. Let me be clear. It’s ALL about the writing, the idea, and its construction. I was a cameraman with NBC (there in DC) for 18 years and I taught at AU. I used to tell students, “Take this down. The 3 most important things of being a news photographer are: 1) The Writing 2) The Writing and 3) The Writing!”. For if you have no harmony between the written word and the visual image, what have you got? Not much!
Still for those pure writers who have not adopted skill sets to move beyond text and convey their message more broadly, there is no time to waste! Get on Lynda. Com and get to work! Because there are multi-mode “content creators” out there and their numbers are growing. And that is as it should be.
Mike Whatley
Altadena, Ca.
Jaclyn Schiff
Apr 27th, 2009
Mike, thanks for stopping in and taking the time to write a comment.
I am on the same page when it comes to the importance of writing. One of the things that I find most frustrating about blogging is that it’s relatively rare to find a really good writer with impressive social media skills that make for a memorable blog.
But my goal with this post was to point out that in today’s multimedia world. interview really works much better in video format. As the discussion above shows, it’s generally good to give users a choice when it comes to content format.
But sometimes it’s just not necessary to produce content in a variety of formats, and it is useful to know what works best for what purpose.
mewcomm
Apr 27th, 2009
“sometimes it’s just not necessary to produce content in a variety of formats, and it is useful to know what works best for what purpose.”
Agreed! No one size fits all. Still I encourage all communicators (especially “writers” ) to develop multi-platform skills.
Cheers,
mew