Radio and TV were part of the DNA at MarketWatch.com (NWS) when we started it 10 years ago.
That means, back in the days of dial-up, we were pushing streaming audio and video down the line. Even as WSJ.com and Forbes.com were figuring out how to get their plain old text into HTML, we were recording, concerting, uploading, and pushing multimedia content.
So, you can understand why this morning’s CNNMoney.com (TWX) ad in the Wall Street Journal is so disappointing. CNNMoney.com is touting Nielsen’s report on online video usage for October, showing it had the lion’s share (57%) of all business and finance video viewing online.
The pie chart says Yahoo Finance was second, MSN Money was third, followed by Forbes.com, CNBC.com (GE), Reuters (TRI), TheStreet.com (TSCM), BusinessWeek Online, and Other.
Where are WSJ.com or MarketWatch.com? It would seem, they are in “Other.” Inside a print-focused editorial system, it’s real hard to get the scribblers’ contributions. Blame deadline pressures, editors’ propensity to check, recheck, and check every word, and a reluctance by some writers to come out from behind their bylines and be seen. MW and WSJ spend a lot of resources producing video and virtually none promoting it.
The simple fact is that audio and video are not a priority; their Managers haven’t been successful in selling it to their bosses, and their bosses haven’t had the time or interest in seeing the possibilities, i.e. ad sales. But CNNMoney does, and then even used the pages of the video-challenged Wall Street Journal to say so.
But that doesn’t explain why people aren’t watching video on these two high-ranking Web sites. There’s plenty of content, posted everyday. Some of it is analysis, some opinion, but precious little of it is ‘breaking’ news coverage. Goes back to that problem if getting the reporters’ attention and contribution.
Well, it’s just disappointing. MW and WSJ video ... ya coulda been a contender.
Comments