It was history and I was struggling to find a place to see it unfold.
The U.S. House of Representative's Democrats were staging a sit-in--the first of its kind in this video-driven digital age-- trying to force House Republicans to vote on a pair of gun control bills.
Whatever side of the aisle you're on, this was (and is) must-see TV. Except it wasn't on TV. On Wednesday morning, as Rep. John Lewis of Georgia and a small group of other Democratic legislators sat down on the House floor, C-SPAN, the public-service cable network that will stream sometimes painfully dull congressional activity, sometimes gripping congressional testimony and at other times chats about books, suddenly lost what may have been its most compelling feed ever.
Not us
A tweet pinned to the top of C-SPAN's Twitter feed notes that they do not actually have any control over the House of Representatives video feed. That control sits in the hands of the House Recording Studio, which is under the control of the House Majority Leadership (currently the Republicans). The cameras go on when House Speaker Republican Paul Ryan hits the gavel and opens a House session and they go off when the gavel goes down again to signal the end of the session.
Of course, it's unlikely Ryan and other House Republicans would have seen it in their best interest to turn the feedback on when the sit-in began.
Fortunately, various on-the-floor representatives and their staff were already live streaming the sit-in through Twitter's Periscope and Facebook Live.
C-SPAN chose to pick up those feeds and deliver them straight to TV.
While I tracked the sit-in through Twitter throughout the day and even caught some Periscope snippets and the live streams directly on Twitter, I didn't really watch the feed until late Wednesday night.
I was following the #NoBillNoBreak hashtag on Twitter and realized that for as interesting as the tweets were, things were heating up in real time on the floor. I wanted to see it live.
I found C-SPAN's web-based feed and started watching. What I saw was remarkable. By the time Ryan returned the House session to order, as the Republicans tried to vote on unrelated bills, the House cameras turned on and C-Span switched from grainy Periscope to the crisp official feed. But as the vote went forward a C-Span anchor took calls, C-Span was effortlessly playing live streams from Periscope and Facebook on the lower third.
Democrats were shouting down the Speaker of the House with "No Bill, No Break!" and soon singing "We shall overcome." It was the most gripping live politics show I'd ever watched.
Big for C-SPAN, too
"It was an unprecedented, milestone moment," C-SPAN Communications Director Howard Mortman told me.
"We knew something was happening on the floor, but the feed was down," said Mortman. C-SPAN producers noticed the streaming video from members of congress on their social feeds "and the decision was made to put that on air."
C-SPAN has used streaming video in the past, but only to add color to other C-SPAN coverage.
"But this is unprecedented, to have this kind of video sustained from Periscope and Facebook Live has never been done," said Mortman.
He could not, by the way, tell me if they used more Facebook Live or Periscope video. The stream did start with California Rep. Scott Peters' Periscope of the sit-in. Mortman said they showed that feed for a while before switching to Facebook Live.
Periscope by a nose?
However, in the hours I watched through the night and even on Thursday morning, most of what I saw were Periscope feeds. And Twitter reported that streams from Peters and fellow Californian Eric Swalwell generated at least 1 million views.
Tweet may have been deleted
Which makes this an important moment for Periscope and a reminder, perhaps, of why we loved the streaming platform in the first place.
Ever since Facebook launched Facebook Live, its own streaming video service, Periscope, whether in fact or perception, has been relegated to second-class citizen status.
Part of that perception has to do with media companies focusing virtually all of their streaming attention on Facebook's product (most are getting paid to do so). These media companies, including Mashable, are going all-in on Facebook Live not solely because it makes financial sense, but to maintain consistent access to the platform's vast, worldwide audience. It's still not, however, the best platform for real-time news.
Periscope parent Twitter is not, as far as I know, paying for anyone to use its product or fill Periscope with content, but it has done work recently to make the service more present and available. Periscope feeds now play live right inside the Twitter stream -- certainly something that helped with the House sit-in visibility -- and, second, there's now a live video feed button right inside Twitter. It's still Periscope, but now you no longer have to open the app.
These were smart, strategic moves, but when most of the media that uses your tool to spread news is using someone else's live video product, it may have been too little, too late.
We're back
Not since the Pacquiao vs. Mayweather fight have we seen something so forcefully thrust Periscope back onto the national stage.
This is Periscope's moment to shine.
"This is unprecedented, to have this kind of video sustained from Periscope and Facebook Live has never been done."
C-SPAN continued to cherry pick Periscope streams of House Democrats taking the floor, one after the other to call for gun legislation, hours after Ryan and others have left. He adjourned the session late Wednesday night and Democrats ended their protest Thursday morning, 25 hours after it began. Streamed over Wi-Fi or cellular coverage, the video quality was all over the map.
"We’re talking about technology that's not of the level and quality that you normally get from a C-SPAN production," said Mortman. But their goal is to get the best streams available and to broadcast content from a diverse set of representatives.
The democratizing platform
I don't know if this sudden surge in Periscope's profile will have any impact on its future fortune, but it serves as reminder of the rather distinct difference between Facebook Live and Periscope. The majority of the Facebook user base posts privately. They all have access to Facebook Live, but are not used to or adept at posting publicly.
Periscope and, more importantly, Twitter's user base posts publicity by default. It's democratic and Periscope was probably the most natural place for the House Representatives and their handlers to turn when they wanted to get the word out, especially after C-SPAN's feed was cut.
As for C-SPAN, they seem sold on streaming video as another content source. Mortman told me that the streams have given them access to the House chamber in ways that weren't possible before.
"It presents an opportunity to be able to add more video to our coverage," he added.
Whether or not that means more airtime for Periscope and Facebook Live feeds is unknown. C-SPAN continued to air sit-in streams until the very end, 25 hours later.
Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.
