Among the many news sites that will be trying to find new ways to cover the political conventions is
WashingtonPost.com, which says it will produce seven hours of live video coverage a day, anchored by Chris Cillizza and Jon Meacham, from the Republican and Democratic conventions.
A news release describes how WashingtonPost.com and
Newsweek.com reporters, "using a cutting-edge cell phone application from Comet Technologies, will be some of the first to live-stream video from their cell phones into a live webcast. Reporters will stream convention developments and questions from people directly onto 'Convention '08,' offering audiences a heightened layer of real-time video coverage. In addition, a live discussion platform online below the video screen will give viewers the ability to interact with anchors and guests."
Look at who will appear on WashingtonPost.com in addition to
Post and
Newsweek reporters and columnists:
I wanted to know why WashingtonPost.com was doing all of this at a time when conventional wisdom holds that nobody cares much about the conventions. I dropped some questions on Jim Brady, the site's executive editor, and Chet Rhodes, the site's assistant managing editor of news video.
Al Tompkins: Seven hours of video streaming from the conventions? Wow. What makes you think people want that online? Jim
Brady: Our goal is to provide users live event coverage and in-depth analysis from the
Washington Post and
Newsweek teams. Not everyone will watch all seven hours of coverage, but we think we'll maintain a steady stream of viewers with some increases around major speeches. In the end, this is an experiment for us, and to experiment on the Web, we've got to be willing to roll the dice and try new things.
I see that you are using a lot of bloggers in your coverage. Why would WashingtonPost.com readers care about what bloggers have to say? Brady: We are including a wide variety of guest perspectives. What matters most to us is bringing viewers the top information and insight on the conventions -- if someone can provide useful information or analysis on topics that matter to viewers, we want them on the show. I don't think it matters to most viewers whether a smart guest is a mainstream media journalist or a blogger. Especially considering there are a lot of bloggers who have helped drive the political conversation on the Web, and I think it is important they have an opportunity to discuss that.
How will your coverage be different from what I can read in the paper or see on TV? Brady: The live Web video program will allow our users to see and hear the speeches and events driving our coverage. Users will see the early take our reporters have on events before they appear in the paper. What we have that TV does not is the full reporting teams of the
Post and
Newsweek and enough time to discuss and analyze the night without interruption. We also will be providing an interactive chat area for users to ask our reporters questions in real-time. Our shows will also highlight original video reporting from a team of video journalists covering the conventions for WashingtonPost.com and Newsweek.com.
How will you do this? Chet Rhodes: We have built a complete TV studio in our workspace in Denver and St. Paul. The latest video technology allows us to set up an HD studio with five cameras and graphics at a small percentage of what it would have cost four years ago. Our Flash streaming technology can deliver thousands of streams at the same time worldwide.
You mentioned "cutting-edge cell phone technology." What's that about? Rhodes: We will be using cell phones equipped with a live streaming application from Comet Technologies. Reporters will use the phones at parties and in the convention hall to stream back live interviews directly onto our webcast. In addition, we will be able to record interviews to play back later.
This will allow us to test this new technology in a crucial news environment. Mobile video reporting will be increasingly important to WashingtonPost.com over the next year.
