Journalistic Video

To analyze a piece of journalistic video, I chose to view something a little less hard-hitting and impactuful. I chose to watch a short interest story from MSNBC. The story was about a 14-year-old eagle that was captured and raised in captivity. But the owners decided to release the bird into the wild, even though the bird had never flown. The owners trained for a year on hang-gliders and finally released the eagle from the top of a French mountain while gliding alongside it.

The visuals in the story are absolutely stunning. Helicopter shots set the scene around the mountain and a videographer clearly rode in a hang-glider as well to capture some amazing footage. None of the shots lasted for longer than 5 seconds, which kept the audience interested and engage.

The narrator was simple and clearly and concisely told the story in an effective way. I would, however, liked to hear some more original voices in the story. This was meant to be a quick and painless story, and I understand that, but why couldn't the network interviewed at least one person. They had video of the person, so I think a sound bite should have been included. Original voices bring an authenticity to the story I feel is lacking thus far. I would have liked to know the outcome of the flight also. The scene was wonderfully set, but then not really explored through to completion.

I quite enjoyed this brief story, but clearly there is room for improvement.

The link to the video story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27163150#%2327163150