5 ms·

The problem with NOVA in this TikTok era is the hour long format that was designed for broadcast TV. A topic with 10 minutes of material is stretched into 45

The problem with NOVA in this TikTok era is the hour long format that was designed for broadcast TV. A topic with 10 minutes of material is stretched into 45 minutes with unnecessary drama and reenactments as filler. Like the kids say these days 'Ain't nobody got time for that'. I'd rather watch a 10 min video on Youtube that covers the same topic.

kossTKR 5y ago
I remember this being an annoyance for a long time. BBC horizon documentaries pretty much took the prize when it came to endless stock video with ambient music and aimless "poetic" quotes from various eccentric scientists talking about some interesting but essentially fantastical topic far removed from any reality or future.
dehrmann 5y ago
Youtubers stretch 30 seconds of material in 10 minutes.
- MetricExpansion 5y ago
  Pithy, but I’d actually argue the opposite. As someone who consumes quite a bit of science content on YouTube, it’s actually quite jarring to go back to traditional TV science shows. It feels a lot less information dense and more time-wasting. An interesting example is when Veritasium, who normally does the usual YouTube science content, got some big budget funding for one video [1] and produced it in a style more like what you’d see on TV. It was striking how there was so much filler and dramatization to try to make it interesting, and the whole thing felt dumbed down compared to his usual content, for example [2], which is deeper and relatively information-dense. And there are channels like PBS Spacetime which go far, far beyond anything I’ve ever seen in any media aimed at a general audience [3]. [1] https://youtu.be/YMDJA4UvXLA https://youtu.be/YMDJA4UvXLA [2] https://youtu.be/OxGsU8oIWjY https://youtu.be/OxGsU8oIWjY [3] https://youtu.be/gSKzgpt4HBU https://youtu.be/gSKzgpt4HBU
- CodeGlitch 5y ago
  You've not watched any Kurzgesagt have you? Sit down for a wild ride: https://youtube.com/c/inanutshell https://youtube.com/c/inanutshell
- watwut 5y ago
  I don't find that to be true in general. I mean, some do that, but it is quote rare. Most don't try to force specific length at all. They are comfortable with super short videos and super long videos and anything in between.
freddie_mercury 5y ago
I don't think it's anything unique to the "TikTok era". It has always been like that, as long as I can remember. Decades ago was the same. My guess is that the primary challenges are a) finding a subject that happens to exactly fit the 60-minute time slot without requiring grievous cuts or padding. I imagine it is hard to know this in advance. I notice, for instance, the bigger, famous theatrical documentaries don't exactly have a uniform run-length. b) production costs. Sure, you could fly around the world to interview another 4 experts and get another 3-hours of footage (that you cut down to 15-minutes) and have a graphics artist who charges $1,000/day generate more models ... or you could just recycle and pad with cheap filler to reach your run-time. After all, you were only given a budget of $X,000 to make a 60-minute documentary.

kossTKR 5y ago

I remember this being an annoyance for a long time. BBC horizon documentaries pretty much took the prize when it came to endless stock video with ambient music and aimless "poetic" quotes from various eccentric scientists talking about some interesting but essentially fantastical topic far removed from any reality or future.

dehrmann 5y ago

Youtubers stretch 30 seconds of material in 10 minutes.

MetricExpansion 5y ago
Pithy, but I’d actually argue the opposite. As someone who consumes quite a bit of science content on YouTube, it’s actually quite jarring to go back to traditional TV science shows. It feels a lot less information dense and more time-wasting. An interesting example is when Veritasium, who normally does the usual YouTube science content, got some big budget funding for one video [1] and produced it in a style more like what you’d see on TV. It was striking how there was so much filler and dramatization to try to make it interesting, and the whole thing felt dumbed down compared to his usual content, for example [2], which is deeper and relatively information-dense. And there are channels like PBS Spacetime which go far, far beyond anything I’ve ever seen in any media aimed at a general audience [3]. [1] https://youtu.be/YMDJA4UvXLA https://youtu.be/YMDJA4UvXLA [2] https://youtu.be/OxGsU8oIWjY https://youtu.be/OxGsU8oIWjY [3] https://youtu.be/gSKzgpt4HBU https://youtu.be/gSKzgpt4HBU
CodeGlitch 5y ago
You've not watched any Kurzgesagt have you? Sit down for a wild ride: https://youtube.com/c/inanutshell https://youtube.com/c/inanutshell
watwut 5y ago
I don't find that to be true in general. I mean, some do that, but it is quote rare. Most don't try to force specific length at all. They are comfortable with super short videos and super long videos and anything in between.

freddie_mercury 5y ago

I don't think it's anything unique to the "TikTok era". It has always been like that, as long as I can remember. Decades ago was the same. My guess is that the primary challenges are a) finding a subject that happens to exactly fit the 60-minute time slot without requiring grievous cuts or padding. I imagine it is hard to know this in advance. I notice, for instance, the bigger, famous theatrical documentaries don't exactly have a uniform run-length. b) production costs. Sure, you could fly around the world to interview another 4 experts and get another 3-hours of footage (that you cut down to 15-minutes) and have a graphics artist who charges $1,000/day generate more models ... or you could just recycle and pad with cheap filler to reach your run-time. After all, you were only given a budget of $X,000 to make a 60-minute documentary.