Neil Slotkin, Produder, Comcast SportsNet
I made this contact while trying to contact the producer of the Flyers game broadcast.
What are your specific duties?
As a Senior Producer at Comcast SportsNet in Philadelphia, I have various roles and they change on a day-to-day basis. Most often, I work as a field producer, which means I go out in the field and conduct interviews with players, coaches, etc. based on the news of the day or the assignment I'm asked to cover. Depending on the assignment I will either work with a reporter, but more often it's just me and a cameraman. I then will typically transcribe the interviews and then write a feature using the best soundbites we gathered. I then will generally edit the features myself on our non-linear editing system. I also travel frequently - I cover all Eagles games home and away, playoff games (I'm traveling with the Flyers right now) and will often go to other big events like All-Star games, baseball winter meetings, etc. When I'm on the road, I must also organize and oversee all of our live news hits with our reporters and coordinate them with our crews back in Philly. There's a ton that goes into this and I won't bore you with all the details.
I also line produce frequently, which means I will be assigned to produce a particular studio show (like SportsNite) and I will determine the order of the stories we will run. I spend the day putting in a rundown (order of stories) and working with our anchors to write the entire show. I will then go into the control room and produce the show, making sure we get all the news in the time allotted, adjusting the rundown for breaking news and most importantly getting in our commercial breaks and ending the show on time.
I most enjoy producing long-format features, but those usually take weeks or even months of collecting interviews and editing and are much longer - not something I have time to do as often as I'd liken. (A typical News of the Day feature on the Flyers may run about 2:00, whereas a long-format feature, say a retro on Donovan McNabb's career which I had ready before he was traded - that will be 6:00 or longer. I typically will create these "retros" for major players that are traded - McNabb, Westbrook, etc. or people who pass away-Harry Kalas, Tug McGraw, etc. They also are usually done well BEFORE the news occurs so I'm often working on stuff thinking it may happen.)
Just so you have some background on Comcast SportsNet (CSN) - our network aims to provide in-depth and comprehensive sports coverage (pregames, postgames, intermissions), breaking news and features with emphasis on the tri-state area (Pennsylvania/New Jersey/Delaware). We want to provide our viewers with exclusive access to the athletes, coaches and important people in the Philadelphia region and cater to the interests and needs of the passionate sports fans in town. We produce and air hundreds of hours of live professional sporting events annually including the Phillies, Sixers, Flyers plus more than 100 college basketball and football games, most in high definition. We reach nearly 3 million households in the 4th largest TV market in the country.
• How did you get started?
I began my career while attending Rutgers University in New Brunswick, NJ. I did play-by-play and produced at our college radio station WRSU-FM. During college I also did an internship at WPVI TV (Ch. 6) in the Sports Department under Gary Papa. I also did an independent study at WFAN Sports Radio in New York. Five weeks after graduating, I landed a job at ESPN in Bristol, Connecticut, and worked as a production assistant for over 3 years. I worked on various studio shows including SportsCenter, PrimeTime (NFL), Prime Monday, NHL-2-Night and many others. I also worked on some remote locations and covered the Patriots-Packers Super Bowl in New Orleans and a Final Four in NY. I then came to Comcast SportsNet in August 1997 and helped launch the network and have worked here in different roles since then (12+ yrs.)
• What experiences led you to this position?
I've held various different roles both at ESPN and here at CSN - from Production Assistant to Show Producer, Field Producer, Feature Producer and now Senior Producer. As I mentioned earlier, I currently do a variety of things on a daily/weekly basis, mostly field producing at various sporting events and cover many different teams and sports (Eagles, Flyers, Phillies, Sixers, Big 5 basketball, high school sports, etc.) The combination of field producing, line producing and feature producing has all helped me get to this position and currently makes up what I do every day. I have also been nominated for 11 Emmys and won 3 times.
• What do you like and dislike most about their job?
LIKE: I like the variety of jobs I can fill so I rarely get bored. I also love sports and grew up in this area (Cherry Hill) so I'm covering the teams I grew up watching on a daily basis. I can cover any sport and feel comfortable interacting/interviewing players and coaches as I do every day. I love writing and telling stories, which is really the most important part of my job.
DISLIKE: Working in sports makes for very long days. It's not a Monday-Friday 9-5 job, which means (with travel) missing holidays and family events and working long hours away from my kids. I also feel I'm underpaid for my experience and work hours/schedule, but that's typical on the production side.
• How do you feel new technologies will impact the media industry in the future?
Since the internet and mobile communication devices are now dominating the landscape, the industry is completely changing every day. At Comcast SportsNet, we are making a concerted effort to improve our website and make a greater push into social media such as Facebook and Twitter. We've budgeted more money and made several hirings in our on-line department and intend to make this the first place our viewers go to for the latest news, information, scores and original web content. We now have the ability to stream some games live on our website (csnphilly.com) and this is just the beginning.
• What recommendations do you have for students?
INTERNSHIPS, INTERNSHIPS, INTERNSHIPS. To get a foot in the door, you have to get hands-on and practical experience. Find as many internships as you can, and the more varied they are, the better. It's important to be well-rounded. Learn how to write well, make contacts in the business, and feel comfortable talking to people - it's all part of communication. Also, strive to do well in your classes in general. Take your grades seriously and work hard, but definitely find time to enjoy the social part of college.
• Where and how can students get started?
Find an area of journalism/communications that you like and get an internship or volunteer. Working at Home Deport or CVS may pay the bills, but it won't get you a job in this business. Most TV/Radio/Marketing departments all hire interns (most without pay/just need college credit) so find one. Start by working the internet and calling people. Then - if you get an internship, just don't go in and do what's asked of you - go above and beyond and make the people there remember you (many interns come and go-only a few make lasting impressions and they get jobs-we almost exclusively hire former interns when low-level positions open up.) Ask questions, but remember-there's a fine line between inquisitive and annoying.
• How important is experience and what is the best place to get experience?
There is nothing more important that experience, competence and confidence. You get it from being around people in the business (internships, making contacts, asking questions, etc.)
• What qualities/characteristics are important for someone getting started in the industry?
Learn how to write well, and just as importantly, be a better listener. Be hungry to learn; go above and beyond what's required. Be prompt and responsible for your actions. Realize that you'll need to have a flexible schedule (late nights/weekends) and be versatile to perform many different types of jobs and be a quick learner.
• Is there an Industry Journal/Trade Publication they would recommend reading?
There's not one publication that I'd suggest, but READ AS MUCH AS YOU CAN: Read the internet, newspapers and magazines every day - know what's going on in the world in general, but also in your business and in your specific line of work.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
HTML5 killed Flash
The next big thing in video will be/is video on mobile devices. The reason that that internet video hasn't expanded to it's potential is because there is no standard way to view the video. Online video is almost always encoded in H.264 which is a type of video file (like avi and wmv). The way that this video had previously been viewed online has been Flash but Steve Jobs things that Flash is not good. He feels that HTML5 is the way that video should be viewed both on PCs and on Mobile Devices both because it takes up a lot less memory than flash and that there is so much more that you are able to do with HTML5 that you can't do with Flash.
Flash has been attempting to be compatible with Mobile Devices but they just haven't been able to. They have attempted to make phones that have Flash Lite but when the phones are released it is either only compatible with very select content or gets canceled right before the device is released. Also Flash takes up a rediculous amount of memory and kills the phone battery.
This relates strongly to our webisode because a way in which they are going to be viewed are mobile devices, much of the time from mobile phones. However, whether phone or other device they are all going to depend on battery life. If users are forced to use the battery killer Flash software then users will not be happy. Users want to be able to watch videos when they like and not have to worry about whether or not the battery will die.
This raises a huge issue because devices that come out either have to be compatible with both or, if it picks one or the other, then if that software becomes obsolete then the user is hurt. The problem is that Flash has been around for so long that, although HTML5 is supposed to be better, people don't want to switch. In my opinion I think that HTML5 is going to take over and there are two reasons: The first is that is takes up a lot less memory; the second is that Apple has become so much more popular and if Steve Jobs says he doesn't want Flash on his devices people will pick HTML5.
The picture is an example of that a HTML5 video could look like. Along with having the video playing you also have the option to attach other things to it. In the right hand corner there is a twitter option that would allow you, while watching the video, the update your twitter with a link to the video. The option in the left hand corner would give you options to do other things.
A real life example of this is Justin.TV. For the iPhone there is an app where you can watch streaming videos. This application is HTML5 and last week while I was in the intermission for my night class I was watching a live hockey game and my battery was not effected.
This relates to User-Generated Content in the book on pages 317-18. It does because a lot of the video that people will be/are viewing on their mobile devices is user generated content. Users will want to be able to go on sites like youtube and metacafe from their phones and wont want their phone battery to be completely drained.
Article
Flash has been attempting to be compatible with Mobile Devices but they just haven't been able to. They have attempted to make phones that have Flash Lite but when the phones are released it is either only compatible with very select content or gets canceled right before the device is released. Also Flash takes up a rediculous amount of memory and kills the phone battery.
This relates strongly to our webisode because a way in which they are going to be viewed are mobile devices, much of the time from mobile phones. However, whether phone or other device they are all going to depend on battery life. If users are forced to use the battery killer Flash software then users will not be happy. Users want to be able to watch videos when they like and not have to worry about whether or not the battery will die.
This raises a huge issue because devices that come out either have to be compatible with both or, if it picks one or the other, then if that software becomes obsolete then the user is hurt. The problem is that Flash has been around for so long that, although HTML5 is supposed to be better, people don't want to switch. In my opinion I think that HTML5 is going to take over and there are two reasons: The first is that is takes up a lot less memory; the second is that Apple has become so much more popular and if Steve Jobs says he doesn't want Flash on his devices people will pick HTML5.
The picture is an example of that a HTML5 video could look like. Along with having the video playing you also have the option to attach other things to it. In the right hand corner there is a twitter option that would allow you, while watching the video, the update your twitter with a link to the video. The option in the left hand corner would give you options to do other things.A real life example of this is Justin.TV. For the iPhone there is an app where you can watch streaming videos. This application is HTML5 and last week while I was in the intermission for my night class I was watching a live hockey game and my battery was not effected.
This relates to User-Generated Content in the book on pages 317-18. It does because a lot of the video that people will be/are viewing on their mobile devices is user generated content. Users will want to be able to go on sites like youtube and metacafe from their phones and wont want their phone battery to be completely drained.
Article
Friday, March 26, 2010
Bryan Cooper
Bryan Cooper
Producer/Director of Flyers
Comcast
I made contact with Mr. Cooper for the station/programming profile. I emailed Neal Slotkin in attempt to contract someone with the Flyers and he got me in contact with Mr. Cooper. I will use Mr. Cooper entierly for my station/program profile.
Bryan Cooper is in charge of the preplanning for the game which involves planning not only the advertisements, in game announcer conversations and the topics of conversation but he is also responsible for making sure that all the cameras and technical aspects of the game are set up and in the places that they are supposed to be. Normally this job is split but as is one of the only director/producers in the league he does both. He got started around 20 years ago when he was picked up
What he likes most about his job is that every day is different. He is never going into work having to do the same thing he did the day before. He also said that there was something about being live that gave him a rush. That what he is doing is being shown live and there is no undo button if something goes wrong, they just have to move through it. Lastly he said that he has a passion for the sport and for the Flyers that makes it work coming into work every day. What he said he disliked the least was apathy. When he goes to away games he works with the crews they have at the stadium and he said he is most frustrated when he gets a crew who's heart isn't in it. As I said in my last post he believes that fans will be given the option to watch there team from many angles and from wherever they want to. Right now a fan of the Penguins who lives in New Jersey would only be able to get the Philly feed but in the future they will have the option to choose between both.
To get started he said that most people get into it through a part time position or an internship. His crew is rather small and he says most people get started working for a sports news show. He said the experience is important but that passion and knowledge of the game that you're doing helps a lot as well. He said that he has worked with many different crews and what really separates someone who's good in sports and someone who isn't is the passion and understanding they have for the game. You could be the best camera man in the world but if you don't understand the game of hockey the viewers aren't going to be impressed. He did not know of any Industry Journal/Trade Publication.
Flyers link
Behind the Scenes
Producer/Director of Flyers
Comcast
I made contact with Mr. Cooper for the station/programming profile. I emailed Neal Slotkin in attempt to contract someone with the Flyers and he got me in contact with Mr. Cooper. I will use Mr. Cooper entierly for my station/program profile.
Bryan Cooper is in charge of the preplanning for the game which involves planning not only the advertisements, in game announcer conversations and the topics of conversation but he is also responsible for making sure that all the cameras and technical aspects of the game are set up and in the places that they are supposed to be. Normally this job is split but as is one of the only director/producers in the league he does both. He got started around 20 years ago when he was picked up
What he likes most about his job is that every day is different. He is never going into work having to do the same thing he did the day before. He also said that there was something about being live that gave him a rush. That what he is doing is being shown live and there is no undo button if something goes wrong, they just have to move through it. Lastly he said that he has a passion for the sport and for the Flyers that makes it work coming into work every day. What he said he disliked the least was apathy. When he goes to away games he works with the crews they have at the stadium and he said he is most frustrated when he gets a crew who's heart isn't in it. As I said in my last post he believes that fans will be given the option to watch there team from many angles and from wherever they want to. Right now a fan of the Penguins who lives in New Jersey would only be able to get the Philly feed but in the future they will have the option to choose between both.
To get started he said that most people get into it through a part time position or an internship. His crew is rather small and he says most people get started working for a sports news show. He said the experience is important but that passion and knowledge of the game that you're doing helps a lot as well. He said that he has worked with many different crews and what really separates someone who's good in sports and someone who isn't is the passion and understanding they have for the game. You could be the best camera man in the world but if you don't understand the game of hockey the viewers aren't going to be impressed. He did not know of any Industry Journal/Trade Publication.
Flyers link
Behind the Scenes
No more channels?
There is a change happening in television today that is a real threat on television channels. When things like Hulu and OnDemand came out people realized that they no longer needed to be sitting in front of their television at exactly 9:00 on Tuesday evening in order to see the newest episode of LOST. Why, when viewers had the option, would they watch a show that may be interfering with another activity when they could just watch in on Hulu the next day? Many viewers wouldn't. I know personally that, except for LOST, I usually sit down whenever I have some free time and catch up on episodes that I've missed. Unfortunately for TV networks this is the way things seem to be going. With the emergence of Wifi enabled television sets what's going to stop viewers from simply going to Hulu.com and watching their favorite show? Many people who are against online viewing are so because of the quality and the tiny screen but when people have the option of viewing it on their big TV sets in clear quality I think they will become fans as well.
The way that this could impact the industry is that it could completely wipe out TV stations as we know them today if they aren't careful. The option to watch TV shows directly off of websites to peoples TV's is going to open a whole new option of viewing armature television. We all know that the site youtube, which is almost all viewer created content, is huge. What is going to keep people from using sites like youtube to create their own shows? And if the shows got bit why wouldn't Hulu offer to show them on their website? This could seriously lead to the end of channel lineups as we know it and the start of armature and independent creating shows and just putting them up on youtube. I think that this is going to have a great impact on the audience. Why would anyone want to search through and pay for television channels, for example the religious channel, if they can just pull up hulu and watch a show online. Or an even better idea. Why not use the OnDemand option. Instead of going onto the internet what if a company build in all the shows to an easy click option on the remote. So that in 10 years maybe there are no channels anymore. When you turn on your television it just sends you to a list of shows and it's your option what you want to watch. This is the way that television is going.
This has some relation to what Bryan Cooper (Flyers Producer) said to me that's going to happen to sports. He said that in the future of sports you are going to have the option to jump in front of your computer and watch any game you want, in any view you want, with which of the two feeds you want. Why not take this and move it directly to television. Say when you turn on your television and you scroll through all the option you decide to watch the Giants game so you click. What if then you were given the option to choose whether you would like the local Giants feed or the out of town Cowboys feed. Then what if they had cameras set up at various positions on the feels and you could choose which one you wanted to watch. Maybe have 3/4ths of the screen taken up by the main broadcast and then the right 4th taken up with three different angles of the game or maybe even three other games.
This relates to chapter 10 which is about webisodes. On pate 319 it talks about how professionally produced content appears daily on an equally impressive number of broadband vide channels. This is what the future of television will be. Instead of making a show for cable TV they will be making single shows to play only on Hulu or OnDemand.
Article
The way that this could impact the industry is that it could completely wipe out TV stations as we know them today if they aren't careful. The option to watch TV shows directly off of websites to peoples TV's is going to open a whole new option of viewing armature television. We all know that the site youtube, which is almost all viewer created content, is huge. What is going to keep people from using sites like youtube to create their own shows? And if the shows got bit why wouldn't Hulu offer to show them on their website? This could seriously lead to the end of channel lineups as we know it and the start of armature and independent creating shows and just putting them up on youtube. I think that this is going to have a great impact on the audience. Why would anyone want to search through and pay for television channels, for example the religious channel, if they can just pull up hulu and watch a show online. Or an even better idea. Why not use the OnDemand option. Instead of going onto the internet what if a company build in all the shows to an easy click option on the remote. So that in 10 years maybe there are no channels anymore. When you turn on your television it just sends you to a list of shows and it's your option what you want to watch. This is the way that television is going.
This has some relation to what Bryan Cooper (Flyers Producer) said to me that's going to happen to sports. He said that in the future of sports you are going to have the option to jump in front of your computer and watch any game you want, in any view you want, with which of the two feeds you want. Why not take this and move it directly to television. Say when you turn on your television and you scroll through all the option you decide to watch the Giants game so you click. What if then you were given the option to choose whether you would like the local Giants feed or the out of town Cowboys feed. Then what if they had cameras set up at various positions on the feels and you could choose which one you wanted to watch. Maybe have 3/4ths of the screen taken up by the main broadcast and then the right 4th taken up with three different angles of the game or maybe even three other games.
This relates to chapter 10 which is about webisodes. On pate 319 it talks about how professionally produced content appears daily on an equally impressive number of broadband vide channels. This is what the future of television will be. Instead of making a show for cable TV they will be making single shows to play only on Hulu or OnDemand.
Article
Saturday, February 13, 2010
3D television
This year Panasonic plans to release a television that will be able to give you an amazing 3D experience. Although they are being released in Japan in April it is speculated that the United States and the UK will be waiting until the fourth quarter of the year to get them. They will be coming out in two different size models; there will be 50 and 65 inch sets witch are expected to range 4.9-6 thousand dollars. I think this is very important because when movies moved to 3D so many others followed in their footsteps. Although there will only be a limited number of stations that will have 3D broadcasts when the sets become more accessible I believe that the other stations will follow. I think that this is going to have a great impact on the audience. People highly enjoy the 3D experience. All you have to do is look at how successful Avitar was to understand that. I also think that audiences will be very excited to experience sports in 3D. HD TV now already makes you feel like you're at the game; imagine what it will feel like to be able to experience that in 3D. When I first saw a 1080 broadcast I didn't think there was anything that could top that so I don't think that 3D television is going to be the last major thing that changes TV.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/panasonic_debuts_viera_vt2_series_first_1080p_3d_plasma_hdtvs
There wasn't anything in the book that really spoke about 3D television.
3D Television
This year Panasonic plans to release a television that will be able to give you an amazing 3D experience. Although they are being released in Japan in April it is speculated that the United States and the UK will be waiting until the fourth quarter of the year to get them. They will be coming out in two different size models; there will be 50 and 65 inch sets witch are expected to range 4.9-6 thousand dollars. I think this is very important because when movies moved to 3D so many others followed in their footsteps. Although there will only be a limited number of stations that will have 3D broadcasts when the sets become more accessible I believe that the other stations will follow. I think that this is going to have a great impact on the audience. People highly enjoy the 3D experience. All you have to do is look at how successful Avitar was to understand that. I also think that audiences will be very excited to experience sports in 3D. HD TV now already makes you feel like you're at the game; imagine what it will feel like to be able to experience that in 3D. When I first saw a 1080 broadcast I didn't think there was anything that could top that so I don't think that 3D television is going to be the last major thing that changes TV.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/panasonic_debuts_viera_vt2_series_first_1080p_3d_plasma_hdtvs
There wasn't anything in the book that really spoke about 3D television.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
LOST LEAKED
The first hour of the ABC hit television show LOST leaked on to the internet before it hit television. So you would assume that many of the fans of LOST would tune in to see the first hour of the show that they've been waiting half a year for; that couldn't be further form the truth. 12.1 million poeple tune din for the season premiere "which is 1 million more than the average weekly audience lst season, and under 1 million more than last year's premiere. Last years premiere had not been leaked early but still happened to have a million less viewers. Nydailynews.com found a comment made by a fan on the site MyWhiteNoise.com "Why spoil it now? I'd rather watch it in hi-def and surround sound rather than ruin the surprise and watch some (low-quality) video." Although many of the clips online are better quality than the LOST premiere are fans saying that they would rather have the HD experience on television than be able to watch the show whenever they'd like online?
I chose this article because I found it interesting that many of the fans were not drawn to watch the show online. As a LOST fan I know how much anticipation there was for this show but I count myself part of the number that would rather have the television experience. There was jsut something about being that group of people who were all in front of their televisions from 8-11 pm watching the premier. I don't think that is something that can be replicated by online media because it is so accessible at your leisure. I think that this is important because the way things are going the internet seems to be taking on TV shows and this just proves that TVs are not yet out of the picture.
This relates to how in the text it talks about how "the web can show anything, anytime.(p326)" And this article proves that sometimes that's not what the audience wants. We still want to have to wait and build up anticipation for television shows. This is extremely evident in the programs that I watch. I am in front of my television every Tuesday night at 9 pm waiting for LOST to come on. I understand how those 12.1 million people could pass over the first hour of the show easily in order to have the experience that we all had that night.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8Mbum8rheg
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2010/02/04/2010-02-04_lost_premiere_gains_viewers_despite_early_online_leaks_many_fans_waited_for_show.html
I chose this article because I found it interesting that many of the fans were not drawn to watch the show online. As a LOST fan I know how much anticipation there was for this show but I count myself part of the number that would rather have the television experience. There was jsut something about being that group of people who were all in front of their televisions from 8-11 pm watching the premier. I don't think that is something that can be replicated by online media because it is so accessible at your leisure. I think that this is important because the way things are going the internet seems to be taking on TV shows and this just proves that TVs are not yet out of the picture.
This relates to how in the text it talks about how "the web can show anything, anytime.(p326)" And this article proves that sometimes that's not what the audience wants. We still want to have to wait and build up anticipation for television shows. This is extremely evident in the programs that I watch. I am in front of my television every Tuesday night at 9 pm waiting for LOST to come on. I understand how those 12.1 million people could pass over the first hour of the show easily in order to have the experience that we all had that night.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8Mbum8rheg
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2010/02/04/2010-02-04_lost_premiere_gains_viewers_despite_early_online_leaks_many_fans_waited_for_show.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)