I shall treasure this contribution as a perfect example of the imbecility of using video or audio in place of the written word without good reason. I watched for two minutes -- roughly what it takes to read a one-page Reg article -- and learned that the piece was something to do with outsourcing. I had no clue as to what the conclusion would be nor what issues it would address. I chose not to waste a further 15 minutes to find out. The fact that what promised to be video was only a slide show with execrable sound quality enhanced the sense of futility.
Why did you post this? What conceivable editorial purpose did it serve? Do you exist solely to waste your readers' time? If I'm wrong and the piece has some interesting points later on, please make a quick summary of them and I'll happily read it.