Live Streaming to the Web: Washingtonpost.com

By Paul Berger

The Washington Post has been streaming live video to its Web site since 2001. In that time it has covered shuttle launches, senate hearings and major news conferences.

But for this year’s presidential primaries, washingtonpost.com took its commitment to video a step further by building a TV set in the newsroom and broadcasting live and continuously on Super Tuesday for seven hours.

The show had an anchor and cut between studio interviews and live reports from the field. It even featured television staples, such as multiple camera angles and basic graphics.

“It was the first time we did anything that long and with that many elements and it was really well received,” says Chet Rhodes, assistant managing editor (video news) for the washingtonpost.com.

Rhodes describes the broadcast as having a “TV feel.” But he says the Post is not trying to mimic television completely. Rather than frantically cutting between segments and limiting interviews to a couple of minutes, the Post allows its reporters to talk at length. 

“We are doing it in a way that makes sense for us,” says Rhodes. “The graphics aren’t as funky as television and the conversations go on a little bit longer. But because our people know their subject so well, we can allow them to talk for a longer amount of time. It’s being able to take the newspaper ethos and convey it in video.”

Rhodes says the Post aims for high production values. Nevertheless, the team is not concerned if a coffee cup is in shot or if an interviewee’s tie is loose. “We’re not trying to pretend we are television,” he says. “It’s for the Web, and nothing other than that.” 

Even so, the challenges of broadcasting a seven-hour show meant that the newspaper had to bring in outside help, hiring a four-man production team and a professional make-up artist. “That meant our staff could focus on editorial content, while the others focused on technical content,” says Rhodes.

The broadcast was successful enough for the Post to leave the newsroom TV set in place so that it can cover the remaining primary nights through the end of the campaign. And it used the set for future major events, such as an April papal visit. 

Although the Post offers a wide selection of high-quality video podcasts, Rhodes says live broadcasts are the most popular Post video content on the Web. (The Post declined to release traffic numbers.)

“Of course, it depends on the broadcast,” says Rhodes. “If it’s a must-see event like a shuttle launch, then the site gets thousands of viewers. If it’s a Senate hearing, then it may only appeal to hundreds.”

Washingtonpost.com started out using RealNetworks technology for its live broadcasts. Then, Rhodes says, they switched to Flash technology about three years ago because it is easier for viewers to use and because it is already present on most home and workplace computers. Additionally, Rhodes says the Post prefers using Flash player because it is stripped of the branding and advertising associated with RealPlayer or Windows Media Player. 

Naturally, the technology that the Washington Post employs for such large-scale, high quality broadcasts is sophisticated. The Post uses a video switcher (def.) to control the content of the video feed. The output of that switcher feeds a video encoding station, which has a video and an audio input. The Post then uses a Flash media encoder from Adobe which converts the video and audio into a flash stream and sends it to an Akamai network. At Akamai it is restreamed to several servers so many people can see the live stream. Akamai also scales the video as needed based on user demand.

Even though such broadcasts can be almost television quality, the question remains why viewers would choose washingtonpost.com over network or cable news. The answer, says Rhodes, is simple. During the daytime many people do not have access to television.

“If they are at work they could go to C-Span’s Web site or cnn.com but we don’t want them to have to go to those places,” says Rhodes. “At least, not if it is a major live event in the Washington area. We want users to be able to find it on our site first.”

Washingtonpost.com readers are informed of upcoming content via e-mail alerts which are sent out no more than two hours and no less than forty-five minutes before each broadcast.

“A lot of people will open the live video and leave it running on one side of their screen and just listen to it,” says Rhodes. “And when some important person steps up to speak, they will maximize it and watch. The great thing is you can take this little screen and put it anywhere you want.”   

As for the quality of the stream, Rhodes says as long as the viewer has a fast internet connection it works fine. The challenge for the Washington Post now is to see whether it can maintain the audience and bear the cost of such high quality live streaming in a competitive market place.

“Live streaming is kind of expensive. But we think it is something important for us and we have been able to get enough viewers to make it really works out for us.”

To see examples of The Washington Post’s live streaming video go to www.washingtonpost.com and look for the ‘live’ tag and a symbol of a video camera next to a headline.

First Published:
May 7, 2008