The other day I was looking for product reviews for an item I wanted to buy. I found a couple of video reviews on this product to watch. But I was so frustrated once the video began, I turned it off. It was too long.
For consumers of media, we live in an amazing time. While traditional media like newspapers, radio, and TV are struggling to adapt to various financial models, the viewers have more choice than ever.
It has never been easier to start a website, a podcast, or post your own videos about any and all topics. The gatekeepers are few. Pick a subject you know a bit about, speak with authority, and soon you too can have your own community of followers. But there is a problem with all of it – editing.
I’ve worked in media for the majority of my career, mostly in the traditional forms of newsprint and radio. All have had some sort of intersection with the online world. The college I attended was smart in the mid-to-late 90s becoming early adopters of this thing called the internet. We all learned how to do basic HTML coding, and work with web browsers. But we all also learned how to write, take photographs, and how to edit.
Editing does not mean just grammar and spelling – it means editing what is to be said to be concise.
These new online forms of media have no limit to what you can do. A website post can be as short as two words, to the 600,000 word opus of Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace. As there is no limit, writers feel the need to say as much as they can to fill the space. Having the ability to write without end does not mean one should.
Similarly the audio and video world is rife with podcasts/vlogs now. For those unfamiliar, podcasts are essentially radio shows that can be subscribed to or selected and be listened to when you want. Again, in the digital world there are no limits. If you want to voice a five minute podcast with a sports report, or a 10 hour podcast hiking the Andes Mountains – you can. Just because there are no limits, doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be. Herein lies is the problem.
As the news and media landscapes turned to a corporate scorched earth beginning in the early-2000s, the first place the corporate masters cut was middle management: ie – the editors. Large newspapers lost city desk editors, specific beat editors, and sports editors, downsizing to just a single editor. Many of the medium-to-large newspapers had copy departments, whose offices were only responsible for editing the spelling and grammar of articles. By the time the corporate bloodletting had finished, those offices had become storage spaces for excess office furniture. You can substitute newspaper for radio or TV too. The lack of editors in an organization is only part of the issue. Brevity. Just because you can write 600,000 words about your topic, doesn’t mean you should.
One guy I know has a podcast. It’s about a topic I am interested in, and the production (audio quality, theme music, etc) is quite good. I can’t stand to listen to more than 20 minutes of each two-plus hour episode. It’s just rambling on with no order or rhyme or point.
Traditional media has limits for a reason. In TV each 30 minute show is 22 minutes of content, plus commercials. Commercial radio works about the same way. Having the boundary of 22 minutes to tell a story means fitting in the important bits and cutting out the not-so-important bits. This makes the show tighter and more concise. The same happens in print journalism.
Page size factors in the print world. The famous quote that applies here is “All the news that fits, prints.” Advertising typically dictates the number of pages per newspaper edition. If there are fewer ads in one paper, you may be forced to cut a 600 word story down to 200 words to fit the space. It takes practice being necessarily concise and some people fail at it. Having endless digital space is great, but if you don’t know how to write concisely, the risk is a rambling mess to read.
Very recently, I had to distill the outcome of a two-and-a-half legal proceedings – that had a publication ban now lifted – into one story. Having boundaries like a limited number word count helped make the writing focused. Cover the important things, and the nuanced detail that may be interested to only a few, was cut from the story. Editing took an over 3,500 word story and cut it in half. The story is the same, but now readable, thanks to editing and boundaries.
There will be a point when the new media understands this concept of editing and boundaries. When it does, all stories told will be better for it.
This column was originally published in the April 17, 2024 print edition of the Morrisburg Leader.