...Or does it?
It changes many things, to be sure. Hyperlinks append the encyclopedia to end all encyclopedias to every article. Flash and php enable “interactive content” much more advanced than simple page-flipping. Many of the games and demos suggested today are excellent examples. The Internet also provides an unparalleled way to track how readers experience pages, articles and demos, through what they choose to click and what they post in blogs.
And yet, in the wake of the internet journalism today, I found myself mulling the question: “All that stuff is very nice, but is it journalism?”
...or, could it be journalism? More directly: are the technologies of the web going to remain supplemental material, or are they going to change the very core substance of journalism in the future?
I doubt it.
Journalists need to “have a multimedia mindset” and that should be heeded, but also taken with a grain of salt. Every story can’t be deconstructed into bits. A story is a story and it is not a quick blurb on a computer screen.
Narrative is primary. People understand the world in terms of stories; that’s what they’re looking for in news. The implicit question people ask when they pick up a newspaper or magazine (or go online in search of news) is “what’s going on?”—and the answer to that can’t always come in choose-your-own adventure form. Breaking a feature article into blurb bios, a game, and a flash animation of the relevant science destroys something valuable. The narrative, the story, is lost. Great story telling is a lost art in the news today. I do not mean a story as in a fictitious way, I mean it in a well balanced true manner.
I heard various grim statistics today about how few people will follow a link to the latter half of a story on the internet (less than 20%). Still, though, if a publication cuts all such stories, it shouldn’t be surprised by a 20% drop in readership.
People do have the patience for longer stories, even if they don’t read them much online. As I said today, I think this is largely the result of the discomfort of reading from current computer screens. I refuse to believe that the attention span for all readers has dropped to 300 words in the last ten years. I think that advances in display technology will prove that.
Just as MTV didn’t kill the feature film’s popularity, I can’t believe that the internet will reduce journalism to blurbs. People will still want someone to connect the dots for them, to tell them a story. And as with every story there will be a reaction and a counter reaction. If there isn’t we will just live in the land of the blurbs.
Please feel free to post a comment after each and every column. Click on the comments at the end of the article
Follow me on twitter at https://twitter.com/drcchasse
or send a friend request on facebook http://www.facebook.com/cris.chasse
E-mail me at drcchasse@verizon.net to get on our mailing list.
Please forward to your friends and colleagues to enjoy. The more readers I have, the more money that is raised for the Dana Farber Cancer Institute.
voice 206-350-6437
No comments:
Post a Comment