The importance of being video

Growing up in the 70's, I was told anecdotally and had heard the words of achievers, that the only thing that mattered were books and contacts. After 5 years, the only difference between 2 people were the number of books they had read and the number of people they had met.

I agreed with that and know it to be true. It did change everything in my life, as I am sure most readers would agree.

At the same time I differed to the extent, and personally felt the importance of movies. At that time no ubiquitous TV at least in smaller towns of India. Movies, especially English ones, opened up about how airports worked, insides of hotels, towns in Europe, Wordl Ware II, espionage practices, cryptography, cultural practices in different countries, exotic Bond movie locations. Lifestyles of the rich and famous. Radio was important for sports and live commentaries. We all heard the 1974 world cup soccer finals on radio - no we could not watch it at the time. Much of the first World Cup Cricket 50 over format in 1975 was on radio. Documentaries before screening of a movie was another source of information and knowledge.

So to books and people, I would add radio and TV. Note newspapers and news is not in the mix as it is an opiate for the masses and immediacy and fast food, #facebook, #whatsapp, #instagram and #tiktok today is brain food that is irresistible.

Back to whether video can and does influence.

One opinion I had about the difference between a movie and book is best amplified by an example that follows. With a book you have to imagine and visualize everything. It happens automatically. Every single reader of a million copies of a book has a million versions and visuals of how it happened. Now a movie changes everything about the same book. One of the million, a wannabe director of a movie version of this, gets a script and directs a video capture, edit and production of the movie. It now includes voice and soundtracks.?Implying that was the music that was playing or not playing at that time.?

Now to the example that I stated earlier. To me the Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth was a book I had read. I had imagined my own version of the whole story, as would of course everyone else who read it. Later I saw the movie Day of the Jackal directed by Fred Zinnemann. (Didn't know it at that time, even now I googled it, for the spelling).?Fred Zinnemann visual version of Frederick Forsyth Day of the Jackal is the ONLY version that stays in your head. You can't imagine, visualize or come up with another version of it. Tough. Yes you can now make another version, another movie of the same book, Version 2.0 from the one million readers versions, but that is the power of video.

By the way, why did I choose "The day of the Jackal" book and movie as an example? It matched my version 100%. A subsequent book and movie the "Odessa file" which I eagerly read and looked forward to was disappointing. Different Director however.

If someone said a picture is worth a 1000 words, a video is worth a 1,000,000 words. (or 1.8 million, I'm not going to fight that). Implication. Nothing to say about it. Nothing more to hear. No other music needed. QED. The truth. It's there. I saw it. It's sacrosanct. That is the language in which it happened. Don't even think about it. It's over. It's done. Finito.

Of the human senses, we have allowed sight to be our dominant sense. We do hear, touch, taste and smell, but only to support what we see or in the absence of it. We even come up with all those on the spot statistics - 5% of what we read, 20% of what we hear, 70% of what we see being retained and all that statistical nonsense. Another piece of nonsense in the graphic of a 1-minute video being worth 1.8 million words.

Truth sometimes gets blurred by a movie. Another personal example, as an Indian of course we all know of, read about and heard of Mahatma Gandhi. Most of us living today, have never met him, nor seen him.?All photos were in black and white.?Then came Ben Kingsley and "Gandhi the movie" directed by Richard Attenborough. It brought Mahatma Gandhi to life for all of us in India - and of course international audiences. Great movie, well deserved praise and all that. We now had a version of it.

On a visit to Madame Tussaud in London years later, there was a waxwork of Mahatma Gandhi. Shock! He was dark. He was short. Not like our tall, fair Ben Kingsley. It was difficult to incorporate the truth into my video version of Mahatma Gandhi. It still takes a mental, visual climb each time.

So there you get the importance of being video. If you have a first video of anything, the rest of history, branding, versions, conversations, social media and just about anything follows.

With a mobile internet connected smartphone, in-phone editing, your voice (or translated voice), add music the 1 in 1,000,000 video version, starts long before even you mind has registered the truth.?Even if you go back and see the video, it has filters, and edit that blurs even the raw video of what you captured - the importance of being video is caving in on itself.