I paid a visit to 18 Doughty St today - home of the pro-COnservative internet TV channel run by Iain Dale and Tim Montgomerie. It's impressive. At low cost they have a very professional operation - it reminded me of the kind of traditional TV operation set up for live coverage of major events - all digital, portable and high quality. I'm interested because it points the way to the future of TV, however convergence turns out, and specifically for the World Service we are looking at internet TV to extend our language services. Iain was generous with his time and very open about the programmes, the operation the successes and the challenges. As it's internet only at the moment it is not subject to Ofcom Regulation on political impartiality. It's not commercially viable and exists thanks to the deep pockets of Stephan Shakespeare. However, the house was bustling and it feels as if it's here to stay and set to expand.
« "What did Foreign Correspondents do, Daddy?" | Main | links for 2007-02-20 »
February 20, 2007
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b49269e200d8351aba5469e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A visit to Doughty Street:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Subscribe:
Search
Paper.Li
Bookshelf
Harold Evans: Pictures on a Page: Photo-journalism, Graphics and Picture Editing
Harold Evans: Essential English for Journalists, Editors and Writers (Pimlico)
Steven Barnett: The Rise and Fall of Television Journalism: Just Wires and Lights in a Box?
Vin Ray: The Television News Handbook: An Insider's Guide to Being a Great Broadcast Journalist
Links
- Alan Mutter - Newsosaur
- Alf Hermida
- American Journalism Review
- BBC College of Journalism
- Brian Cathcart | The Guardian
- British Journalism Review
- Charlie Beckett | on Journalism and Society
- Columbia Journalism Review
- Emily Bell
- Ethan Zuckerman
- European Journalism Centre
- Frederic Filloux - Monday Note
- George Brock
- GRNLive
- Jay Rosen
- Jeff Jarvis
- Jim Romenesko
- John Naughton
- Journalism Foundation
- Knight Digital Media Center
- Kristine Lowe
- Leveson Inquiry | LSE Media Policy Project
- Mark Danner
- Media network | The Guardian
- Media Standards Trust
- Mediashift
- MediaStorm®
- MIT Center for Civic Media |
- Nieman Lab
- OWNI
- Poynter
- Project for Excellence in Journalism
- Rebecca Mackinnon
- Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism
- Roy Greenslade
- Tehran Bureau
- The Frontline Club
- The Leveson Inquiry
- Thomson Foundation
turn around and look the other way richard. they have no audience, and they never will. if they have interesting ideas, they are squandered in video. online, video is a complementary medium. is there any value in watching iain dale's ideas? NO. would they be of more use to everyone in machine-readable, word-searchable text? YES.
Tis nothing more than a vanity project.
Posted by: Steve | February 20, 2007 at 07:08 PM
I'm less interested in what the content is or is not - more in the cost of production and distribution, and the ease of it. Video may be complementary now, but will it always be that way?
Why is TV a more powerful communication medium than print?
Posted by: Richard S | February 20, 2007 at 07:38 PM
I think, first, becuase of the size of the audience. More people watch TV news, TV was the primary source of information for 65% of the public during the last general election according to Ofcom, so it has more power.
Second, and a reason for the first is, becuase you can convey far richer information through video, in far less time, than you can in print.
Whether Doughty St would be of use to anyone in video or print is a moot point.
Posted by: jamie | February 21, 2007 at 05:38 PM