If at first you don't succeed...

I'm not really sure what my stance is on the great video debate. I think that it's such a new thing that it's too early to be putting all these restrictions and rules on it. I think right now it's all about trial and error. See what works, see what stories are best told using video, see what people like, see what is more compelling, interesting and informative using video.

I am leaning toward the idea that every reporter should have a camera with them at all times. You never know what you're going to capture, or even randomly come across while you're out on an interview or something. As it stands, there isn't a designated video person at most small papers, so reporters should get used to using the equipment, even if it's just a crappy digital camera. That being said, I think papers should really invest in having a trained professional that knows about video and supply them with the equipment to make good video. Video is going to be the future, so it's going to be important to get on board. 

It's going to take a lot of time for video to evolve, especially with small local papers. You can't just start doing something and expect it to be perfection. I think the only way for it to get to a professional level and be mainstream is to try everything. The things that work will improve, and the things that don't will be dropped. 

I definitely think newspapers should put more effort in to "advertising" the multimedia material on their website. It is a website after all, it doesn't have to look like a replica of the front page. I think it should be a big section at the top of the website that grabs viewers' attention. It should be one of the first things a viewer sees, therefore it should provide them with something different than what they're getting delivered on their doorstep.

I think it's more important to be creative, innovative and original and try a million random things than to work to try to perfect a small handful of projects.