The University of Utah v. James Madison University's Bike Safety Video

As my last blog post noted, JMU's bike safety video is not very effective in educating or interesting students. Even though the information presented is incredibly important, the manner in which it was presented did not articulate that.

Comparatively, the University of Utah's bike safety video is far more interactive, entertaining, and informative than James Madison's current video. Here, their video has more upbeat and intense music, the action shots are quick and interesting, which instantly grabs the attention of viewers. There is only one narrator throughout the entire video, but she is enthusiastic and clearly not reading off a script but talking in a casual tone where it feels like a conversation. This makes the video already much more authentic than JMU's.

Their video also clearly articulates what resources are available for their students around campus and offered by local police. The narrator demonstrates how to use several of the resources and tools offered around campus to make biking more appealing and feel safe. Therefore, this video not only articulates safety but also encourages students to ride bikes because of all the resources available to them. Finally, compared to JMU's video, they have far more ways of sharing their story by adding social media links at the end of the video and also sharing this video on their website and other social media outlets.

JMU's safety video is significantly less effective than the University of Utah and UC Davis' videos, both of which I have analyzed throughout this blog series. In order to create a "sticky story" about bike safety, JMU needs to incorporate aspects of both videos. To begin, they need to have an enthusiastic narrator who is excited and engaged with the audience, and unfortunately, this person is not President Alger. Instead, they need to make the video more relatable by using an everyday student narrator, like they did at the University of Utah.

Next, they need to have the narrator explaining and illustrating bike safety, not just using them as a voice over. By having the student narrator engaged in the film as an active bike rider at JMU, it makes it seem as though more students understand safety procedures and actually abide by them. The music used in the JMU video was not memorable or catching either. The music needs to be more upbeat and excited in order to indicate the tone of voice of the film.

In addition to a student narrator, student interviews and interviews with police officers would also be highly effective as they were in the UC Davis video. When students were asked their opinions on bike safety, it made the video feel more casual and actually made me want to hear how the University community felt about biking. Thus, the JMU video really needs to connect more with students by being centered on students, not just the idea of safety.

Finally, the JMU video needs to be broken down into manageable parts. There is too much information in too little time in the current video. Instead, they need to break each subject into longer, individual videos that can provide more information and utilize my suggestions listed above. This way, students are more engaged in a shorter, informative video that is also relatable. Although James Madison University does not have a higher centralized bike culture like other campuses, it would be great if it began to have one. Having a more informative video that illustrates campus interest in biking is one possible way to increase these chances.