{"id":5565,"title":"Community Video: An Inner Look","kind":"biblio","url":"https://www.videohistoryproject.org/community-video-inner-look","version":"09cc19241a5c04331f45b07504f9f53e6a653550a4213fb2b72fe3777d0d6c43","modified":"2026-09-13T21:52:04.4387778+00:00","credits":[{"role":"Author","name":"Ken Marsh"}],"authorKeys":["Marsh, Ken"],"subjects":["Texts by Author"],"metadata":[{"label":"Publication","value":"Videoscope","url":null},{"label":"Publisher","value":"Martin Gordon","url":null},{"label":"Date","value":"1977","url":null},{"label":"Place","value":"New York, NY","url":null},{"label":"Volume","value":"1","url":null},{"label":"Issue","value":"2","url":null},{"label":"ETC archive","value":"ETC0615","url":null}],"citations":{"page":"\u0022Community Video: An Inner Look.\u0022 Video History Project, Experimental Television Center, 2026. https://www.videohistoryproject.org/community-video-inner-look.","publication":"Ken Marsh. Community Video: An Inner Look. Videoscope. vol. 1, no. 2. Martin Gordon. 1977.","risUrl":"https://www.videohistoryproject.org/citation/5565.ris"},"links":[{"label":"Scanned document","url":"https://archive.org/details/ETC0615","relationship":"linked document; contents not retrieved","contentType":"application/pdf"}],"sections":[{"name":"body","source":"VHP record body","generated":false,"characters":18612},{"name":"summary","source":"existing VHP generated summary","generated":true,"characters":733}],"content":{"section":"body","source":"VHP record body","generated":false,"text":"The idea of community video grew out of the late sixties, when those who picked up the camera did so to effect change in the use of technology in communications politically, socially and aesthetically. Community video is defined as self-supporting TV production facilities, operated locally by local people and utilizing cable TV systems for exposure of programs to local fellow viewers. It all sounds so good, like democracy. However, it hasn\u0027t quite worked. Dollar support for community video is meagre, production facilities are scant, viewership miniscule, and cable system operators uneven and reluctant in their cooperation. As a part of the so-called alternate media movement, I have worked in New York City and Woodstock and rural environs on community video projects. I am in the process of shifting my energies and focus away from community video and directing it toward a more personal use of electronic technology in the arts. The conclusions I have reached about community video are a result of almost eight years of experience. In an effort to document and communicate what has evolved over the past years, I have been talking to and recording interviews with video and non-video people exploring their perceptions of community video. Here are three interviews recently conducted in the Woodstock area. Val Cadden Woodstock Town Supervisor Val Cadden, Woodstock\u0027s Town Supervisor, has been active in town government for several years and thereby is an overseer of the community video activities. Woodstock\u0027s cable TV channel is designated as a town channel. Access is by permission of the town board. She and Woodstock Community Video have been instrumental in the setting-up and programming of the channel. No other group has utilized the channel since its opening in May, 1972 and unfortunately last fall, programming stopped on a regular basis because there was no local dollar support. However, the channel remains available for use. WCV occasionally programs it and the one other user has been a local radio enthusiast who produces music programming when he has time. As WCV relinquishes its role in community video in Woodstock, hopefully other institutions and individuals will pick it up. Q: In a general way I want to understand what people think community video is. What you think it is? A: Well, I think community video had a very important role in the town of Woodstock when it was in operation, showing town board meetings, and it was very beneficial when it had the candidates together before an election. I\u0027m very sorry you\u0027ve had the problems you\u0027ve had in keeping it going. I know there are so many more things it could be involved with, like the Maverick Concerts-lots of different things that are going on in town-but I don\u0027t know how you\u0027d be able to pull it together and get it going. Q: It\u0027s an economic problem. It needs to be supported, especially to take on some of those kinds of productions. The arrangement with the town has been unlike a lot of other towns. Why hasn\u0027t the town come through with some real financial support? A: I know that the last town board was the one that was involved in this. The reason they did not want to get involved any more than they did was that they did not want to enlarge the functions of government anymore than need be. It\u0027s the history that when the town takes on a new function, it keeps growing and becomes more and more of an expense to the town. That is why the town did not really get involved in it. Q: To the extent that the town could have supported programming of town functions like the town board meetings and election-related programming, why weren\u0027t at least the costs there met? Are those justified costs for the town? I don\u0027t think they\u0027re justified costs for a town budget to fund this type of thing. We fund legal notices and things like that, but publicity-oriented things I don\u0027t think can be a part of a town budget. From revenue sharing, monies might be able to be given, but not to do your town board meetings or your campaigns. Anything for a campaign would have to be paid for by a party. That would not be a town function, either. The town really can\u0027t get involved with politics in that way. Q: How would you see a community video group continuing with what we have started, doing the town board meetings, documentaries on various events. How would you see them funded? A: Since you are non-profit, this is where there is a real problem. I think it would have to be funded through advertising. One of the businesses in town, or, say the Chamber of Commerce, or someone who would want to fund this and get their advertising at the same time. The Chamber seems like a good one to do something like that. Q: Being commercial might work against continuing to carry town board meetings, which many people feel are boring and may not want to watch as compared to something along more entertaining lines. A: That might be very true. Today, the economics are so bad that everyone is really careful. You might have trouble with your merchants being willing to advertise at this point. I think the time is bad and the whole tenor of the feelings of people throughout the country just are not prone to get something new going and really being supportive. I think community video could be beneficial to Woodstock, but I can\u0027t think of any way at this point that it could become financially in a position to sustain itself without the outside grant you have. Q: You\u0027ve watched and been a part of some of the shows. I get criticism that the programming is amateurish. What are your feelings on that? A: Well, on some of the shows, sometimes, the audio is not just the way it should be. But, for myself, when I\u0027m looking at an interview or something about the town, people from the town, I myself don\u0027t mind if it\u0027s a little amateurish, but I know there are other people it does bother. I find one of the charms of it is to see the people I know just the way they are. I enjoy it. Q: What\u0027s been your family\u0027s response, generally, to the programming? A: They would really only watch it if there were something that we were interested in. My daughter would usually be up on it and know what\u0027s going on. Q: The viewership was not all that great . . . A: I think a lot of people did not even know you were on all the time. I think probably a lot more publicity, I know you tried, but I don\u0027t know how you get all these things over to the people. Do you have any idea how many people were watching? Q: No. The cable mailing list was not made available to us and thus no surveying could be done. The only way to know was through people walking up to us in the supermarket or on the street and making some comment. If there would have been a significant viewership, would that have played a part in the town funding of community video? A: It might have. Under normal conditions, yes, if it\u0027s legal, but, as I said, it just was not the right time for the town to get involved due to the economy. I think if you had announced to the taxpayers that next year you were going to spend another ten thousand on community video, your taxes are going up a couple of dollars, right now, there is no one in town who wants their taxes to go up one penny. Again, I think it\u0027s due to the economy. Q: One more question. The cable company is paying a franchise fee. It comes out to somewhere around seventeen hundred dollars. That money would be a logical resource for funding video activities. It\u0027s a small amount and would barely dent the need, but, that money was never made available. Why wasn\u0027t it used before? A: I think last year was the first year it went to seventeen hundred dollars. The year before that, I\u0027m not sure of the figure, but it was a very small amount. I think that came in May. At the time, we were already into the welfare problem for which all our extra funds were needed. Something could be looked into for the future, when we get these other programs taken care of. But I think that\u0027s a very good question you ask, and I never really thought of it myself. Judi Mills Videomaker Judi Mills is a recent graduate of Vassar College, who has worked with video in the Mid-Hudson area and in Boston. She was the first Vassar graduate to produce her major final work on videotape, just this last spring. Now she is working with a community action agency, networking videotaped social service information to Mid-Hudson cable TV systems. Q: What does community video mean to you? A: Community video is programming by people in an area to people like themselves in that same area, talking about things that are important to them and what\u0027s going on in their particular community. It\u0027s community based. It stems from the community and comes right back to it. Q: Are there any particular technical aspects to it? A: Generally, it\u0027s been the most inexpensive equipment that you can have; 1/2-inch video is something I don\u0027t think broadcast TV is quite ready for, and is something that people aren\u0027t used to watching - because it is not technically perfect. Q: You\u0027ve been involved with a regional programming project, you have worked in Boston with video. What do you think has been the level of success of community video? A: You certainly get a lot of interest from the people who are doing the community programming, but as to people watching it, I don\u0027t think it has had the success that it might have. Q: If it\u0027s not being well-received on the local level, then the concept of community video is short-circuited. Why is that happening? A: There are a couple of things short-circuiting video. One, I mentioned before, is that the material being presented is not the same quality people are used to watching. It\u0027s not always entertaining. It\u0027s educational and a lot of people don\u0027t like educational television. That\u0027s why educational TV now is called PBS, public broadcasting. Another thing is that you are dealing with, for the most part, a fairly apathetic public. They\u0027re interested as long as it\u0027s their kids who are producing the shows, and as long as it\u0027s their cause that\u0027s being aired on the community video tube, but otherwise, the quality gets them before the information does. Q: Do you think that there are enough various factions of the community participating even if it is just to watch their own? A: No. I think that what you have is, what we were talking about before, throwbacks to the sixties, people who are very into community involvement and want people to be able to make their own environments better to live in. You have younger people who are coming up now who are very excited about having television available to them. But you are reaching a population, a general population, that is more interested in getting themselves fed, whose personal problems are much more important and harder to deal with. What good is community video going to do them? Will it get jobs, cheaper food prices? If not, it\u0027s just a boring thing to do, community TV, and so the general public is not involved. Q: So what are you doing, Judi? A: I am a throwback to the sixties. But I do it because I like video. I always see things in video as if I were living my life on a videotape. I do it because there\u0027s a double edge to the knife. One is that I get my own creative energies out and do what I like to do, which are documentaries, and the other thing is, maybe, there are people out there who are going to learn something from what I do. Q: If nothing changed in a couple of years in the level of impact that community video has, do you think you would abandon it for other areas of pursuit in this field? A: My main interest is to be working with children, a two year personal goal. I want to work with them in a community video set-up-the children as the community. Children are always excited about these things. I think I\u0027d always get the positive feedback I need. Now, the question is, if in two years community television is not successful, I am not going to have the money to do that. If I can\u0027t support","offset":0,"nextOffset":12000,"totalCharacters":18612,"complete":false},"rightsUrl":"https://www.videohistoryproject.org/terms-service"}