During Week 4 we talked about what an ideal, "aggregated" story looks like. We noted that even the New York Times does this, drawing from diverse sources and using links, to create a well-informed piece.
We took a look at how some outlets, including the Los Angeles Times, use Storify to compile tweets about a news event.
I expressed my opinion that I liked it better if the compilation of such tweets were choreographed and guided by the author's voice and not just stacked.
We compared two broadcast sites, KTLA News and KPCC 89.3 FM, and talked about what they did and didn't do well. One common concern was their inability to translate their broadcast reporting expertise on the web, though KPCC was doing an interesting job of posting audio clips. The identity of the two sites was in question too: KTLA used a lot of national stories, but it's a local news operation on-air. KPCC was dry and statewide. We weren't sure what it wants to be.
We talked about why voice, snark and opinion is so crucial today: We're fighting for your attention, and there's a lot of competition. This explains the rise of sites like buzzfeed and Gawker.
We talked a little about how to use audio. If I get something good on audio, I like to upload it to Soundcloud and embed it in a story.
But with audio and video, I feel that the journalist has to lead the story with print-style reporting. Rarely does video or audio lead the show. Even when it does it needs to be explained by the author.
No comments:
Post a Comment