This post is also available in Spanish
After watching “Carrying Darisabel” by The York Daily Record, I knew that it would be a great fit for II’s round table series. Specifically, I have two distinct questions I would like to ask you regarding this site. First, do we, as producers, still need to create a Flash intro screen to “glam up” a video or other simple media presentation? Then, going back to the infamous length question, is 20 minutes too long for a passive video story that occurred in the past with limited real-time content?
Let’s start with the design and layout of the site. I love the image of the little girl smiling in the background. The static title and intro treatment is fitting. But, what about this forced intro of multiple sound bytes – is it needed here? It reminds me of the introduction I programmed for Roanoke.com’s “Age of Uncertainty” package. Granted, they added a skip button which was definitely needed on the one I did, but is 2010 the year where we completely forgo intros and simply present the users with the best content from the site as a way to grab their attention?
I was disappointed when I clicked on the “Experience their story” button and it jumped me out of the package to a blank video page. All of the time and effort spent creating a mood and feel for the story in the splash page was gone once I got to the video page. Why not just overlay the video player on the splash page over the girl’s face? There should be no reason to push the user to a separate page and then force them to use a back button to get back to the homepage.
Furthermore, why does the site navigation disappear once I click on a section? Since it is located along the bottom of the page, it seems as if they could have kept the navigation links up while I read about the story, looked at the community resources, and browsed through the other related content. This would remove the need for having an “Exit” button on each of the section pages and allow users to more easily navigate from one sub-section to the next.
Now, let’s talk about the video. Photographer Jason Plotkin (and others) did an excellent job producing this piece. The lighting and angles of the interview tracks are beautifully shot and edited together. While I would have liked to hear the 911 call at the beginning, or see more crime scene footage to get a better sense of what the responders saw, I completely understand the limitations that they probably encountered in using this type of content (if it even existed).
Truth be told, I watched five minutes and then started clicking around the timeline to see if the other 15 minutes also had mostly interview footage. It frustrates me that it lost my attention. How is it that I will dedicate 30 minutes each night to the nightly news, but I can’t sit and watch a 20 minute web documentary?
Honestly, there are only a handful of web videos that I will sit and watch from beginning to end. Why is that? Is it because the TV only has a limited offering and so I’m not as likely to browse, but once I get on the Internet it is too easy for me to click away to something else?
We have had the debate here on II before regarding the length of other passive multimedia, including MediaStorm’s videos. If I recall correctly, Brian Storm told me recently that the average time on their site is 12 minutes. Do viewers have a different mindset when they peruse videos on MediaStorm, similar to Hulu where they go to the site already invested to spend quality time with the content? Or, did YouTube ruin us in terms of not being able to watch a passive video for more than the infamous three to four minute mark?
So, be honest: how long did you watch this video?

Discussion
View Comments for “Multimedia Round Table | “Carrying Darisabel””