In my Citizens and Media class, the majority of my classmates regularly proclaim their love for print, particularly newspapers.
They all say that they love to read the print edition of the paper and are deeply concerned by its demise. For years I have been of a similar mindset, thinking that the disappearance of newspapers would be a terrible occurrence.
But I've been reevaluating my stance on newspapers and I realize that I do not exactly share their concerns. As a news designer, I've always felt a loyalty to newspapers, but honestly, they're difficult to read. They leave newsprint on your hands and they're not valued by consumers. And, from my experience, visual elements are often cut by newspapers to make room for more copy.
I think that new media is making newspapers more efficient and more valuable. Links, slideshows, videos and other multimedia are enhancing the papers' content and providing better information for audiences. Plus, it's more convenient to read the paper on your laptop or iPad than to hide behind broadsheets.
But more than that, most people don't like to read. I'll admit that sometimes I only read the headlines and maybe the first few paragraphs, but unless the story is remarkably interesting, I usually don't make it to the jump.
However, if there's a chart, a timeline, a raised quote or any other type of pulled-out information, I definitely read it.
I think the Internet is enhancing these features. There are no spacial constraints, so every story can have an info graphic or bulleted lists that make information easier to process.
Approximately 65 percent of the population are visual learners, according to several Web sites.The brain can process visual information 60,000 times faster than it can process text, and 90 percent of information that comes to the brain is visual.
So is online news and the possible demise of newspapers really as depressing as my classmates thing? Or will online visuals appeal to a wider audience and make getting news more convenient?
4.12.2010
4.05.2010
What your media preference says about you
During an interview last week, I was asked how I get my news. This was an easy question for me: Twitter, Facebook, RSS feeds, Slate, The New York Times (online), The Daily Tar Heel (in print) and sometimes digg.com.
I thought nothing of the question, or of my response. But as I analyzed my interview, waiting to hear if I had been selected for the position, I wondered what our news sources say about our personal character.
It has long been said that traditional media appeal to the older generation, the people who grew up reading the newspaper with their morning coffee. Is this a reflection or a symptom of their greater voter turnout?
My grandparents subscribe to the newspaper. They have a leisurely breakfast each morning and flip through the pages of The Washington Post. Then before bed, they watch the local television news. They are both solid republicans who are politically active and participate in political campaigns.
My mother subscribed to The Charlotte Observer for years, until she started her own business and began working 90 hours per week. Now she gets her news primarily through interactions with customers and from my stepdad, who always shares the latest tweets from CNN.
Despite their opposite political opinions, they are both somewhat politically active, meaning they vote in every election, even the local ones.
My stepmom, who is 20 years younger than my mom, gets her news from Facebook. She only cares about "reconnecting" with her high school friends online. I asked why she has never subscribed to a newspaper, and she said that she wouldn't read it even if she had it. It's not a matter of saving time or money; it's simply a lack of interest.
She has never been registered to vote and probably never will be.
I can't help but wonder if age is not the only factor in the disparity between voter turnout. Are people who rely on traditional media more likely to be politically active than their counterparts who prefer new media? Or is age really the only difference?
Using these questions, I began subtly analyzing my friends. One of them is a political science major who is the definition of political activity. He said that he reads The Washington Post in print, as well as the print edition of The Daily Tar Heel. He also said that social media is, in his opinion, not news.
Another girl knows little about politics, save what her uncle, a politician himself, tells her. She said she only pays attention to news when other people talk about it. Even then she relies on what people are saying in person or on Facebook.
By no means do these responses answer my questions about the correlation between medium and political activity, but I would still argue that how we get our news says a lot about our character, particularly our political efficacy.
I haven't found much research on the question, but I think it's worth exploring. But, I guess my interviewer liked my mix of old and new media, because I got the job!
I thought nothing of the question, or of my response. But as I analyzed my interview, waiting to hear if I had been selected for the position, I wondered what our news sources say about our personal character.
It has long been said that traditional media appeal to the older generation, the people who grew up reading the newspaper with their morning coffee. Is this a reflection or a symptom of their greater voter turnout?
My grandparents subscribe to the newspaper. They have a leisurely breakfast each morning and flip through the pages of The Washington Post. Then before bed, they watch the local television news. They are both solid republicans who are politically active and participate in political campaigns.
My mother subscribed to The Charlotte Observer for years, until she started her own business and began working 90 hours per week. Now she gets her news primarily through interactions with customers and from my stepdad, who always shares the latest tweets from CNN.
Despite their opposite political opinions, they are both somewhat politically active, meaning they vote in every election, even the local ones.
My stepmom, who is 20 years younger than my mom, gets her news from Facebook. She only cares about "reconnecting" with her high school friends online. I asked why she has never subscribed to a newspaper, and she said that she wouldn't read it even if she had it. It's not a matter of saving time or money; it's simply a lack of interest.
She has never been registered to vote and probably never will be.
I can't help but wonder if age is not the only factor in the disparity between voter turnout. Are people who rely on traditional media more likely to be politically active than their counterparts who prefer new media? Or is age really the only difference?
Using these questions, I began subtly analyzing my friends. One of them is a political science major who is the definition of political activity. He said that he reads The Washington Post in print, as well as the print edition of The Daily Tar Heel. He also said that social media is, in his opinion, not news.
Another girl knows little about politics, save what her uncle, a politician himself, tells her. She said she only pays attention to news when other people talk about it. Even then she relies on what people are saying in person or on Facebook.
By no means do these responses answer my questions about the correlation between medium and political activity, but I would still argue that how we get our news says a lot about our character, particularly our political efficacy.
I haven't found much research on the question, but I think it's worth exploring. But, I guess my interviewer liked my mix of old and new media, because I got the job!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
