So Reality Winner, former NSA contractor, is in federal prison for leaking classified information — for five years and three months, the longest sentence of any whistleblower in history. She gave documents on how Russia had attempted to hack vendors of election machinery and software to The Intercept , which completely bungled basic security procedures (according to a recent New York Times piece from Ben Smith, the main fault lay with Matthew Cole and Richard Esposito ), leading to her capture within hours. Winner recently contracted COVID-19 in prison, and is reportedly suffering some lingering aftereffects. Glenn Greenwald has been furiously denying that he had anything at all to do with the Winner clusterfuck, and I recently got in an argument with him about it on Twitter. I read a New York story about Winner, which clearly implies that she was listening to the Intercepted podcast of March 22, 2017 , where Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill expressed skepticism about Russia actually b
I thought it was swell, Ryan. Succinct, punchy, interesting. I was wondering why such a quick pace? Your normal speech pattern is not that swift. I could follow you, but just. I'd like to debate the comparison of the danger of a nuclear war with the danger of climate change with you one day. But in the end, I agree with your conclusion. Hope you make some more video comments. I really liked it. BReplyDelete
I agree with B. Excellent video with the right tone and arguments but you could have slowed down a little bit. I don't know what the right pace would be but somewhere between how you normally speak it the speed in this video would probably be the sweet spot. Most important is that you make more videos because this one was great. Good job man.ReplyDelete
Thanks guys! Part of the quick speech is probably just imitating one of my favorite video game reviewers, though I think it does make you pay attention a bit more. I'll have to experiment with that. Any suggestions for the next subject?ReplyDelete
And Noah, what are you up to these days?
I agree with the other commentators. It was a great video, with good material and interesting narration, but the pacing was a tad too quick. Looking forward to the next.ReplyDelete
You're a fast learner, Ryan, so the noob argument is null. First off, it is much more focused than your first entry, and it shows that you're more willing to experiment with editing possibilities. That being said, here's some feedback from which I hope you will benefit:ReplyDelete
In my opinion, the juxtaposition of a slow and deliberate narration against flash images often depicting what is already being spoken, either directly or vicariously (and not without added [often personal] emphasis), is contrapuntally ineffective. By providing little to no contrast with the subject matter depicted in the visual imagery, the only variation we detect occurs in the pacing -- as every commentator has indicated. The solution to this is simple: break the dominating rhythm established by the narration by focusing on key thematic elements and advance them in sequences, rather than laying down a complete audio track and assembling -- like a motion collage -- a set of corresponding images. This splitting process does not dismiss what the narration states by any means; rather, it provides ample breathing room for the audience to allow the meaning of what is being said to settle in, giving time for accompanying -- and (I would recommend) contrasting -- visual imagery to reiterate through counterpoint a deepening sense of ethical iteration to what is essentially being addressed through the audio. Setting musical cues aside, consider the possibility of laying down an ambient track of various (preferably relevant) environments beneath the narration, meshing with fades out and in from the narrative track, to provide you with a continuous bed of sound for arranging your images. I think you'll find this really works wonders for cathartic poignancy. As a last suggestion, I would ask you to try and watch the video (i.e. just the visual imagery) without the narrative track upon completion and to take some notes about how progressing from one image to the next produces emotional responses, e.g. heightened suspense, sorrow, hope, etc., and to see if the subjective cadences match what you would like to have resonate from the material being discussed. (This final step is often best reiterated through second and third opinions from people who have not heard the audio track.)
That being said, I think your next vid on Climate Change would benefit greatly from some of the philosophical issues presented in Stephen M. Gardiner's "A Perfect Moral Storm", though any form of conversation on this topic is valued.
Keep up the good work, editing is all about practice and learning what styles suit you, and I look forward to your next entry. Cheers, A.B.P.