The first source that I had heard about the Paris attacks from were from the BBC which I got to through reddit. The article started off as simply text with promised updates and grew as more information came in. At first, as I recall, the explosions at the French national soccer stadium was reported. This was most important at the time as the French president was attending the match between the French and German national teams in a friendly. The explosions were audible during broadcasts of the game, and it was eventually determined that these explosions were as a result of suicide bombers. The second thing I recall being reported were the shootings at the Bataclan concert hall. At the time, the American band "Eagles of Death Metal" were performing there. The BBC continued to report increases in death tolls and new locations of shootings, as multiple different restaurants were also targeted. As more media came in, the BBC added photos from the scenes of the attacks, particularly the ones from the soccer match and the Bataclan, which ended up taking the most damage of any location. Eventually, using Google Maps, the BBC added a google map to show the locations of the attacks in relation to each other. Videos came in of survivors fleeing the scenes of the shootings. They added interviews of survivors and figured out that this was an extremist attack plotted by ISIS. They also had a live feed going which updated every time new information was added. A user on reddit also did this up to the minute, which is what I personally followed more intently. That being said, the BBC was far more detailed overall and the multimedia they added was not invasive and in fact gave the story more personal depth as they only used what seemed to be the most valuable media available. NBC news also had an article that was updated as new information came in. They had a map timeline that was actually quite useful, as it showed all of the locations that had gotten attacked and when they got attacked in local time, showing the progression of the attack. It was also the only news source that I saw that included the number of those injured in the attacks, rather than those killed. There were 352 victims injured in the attacks, and 128 dead. Some other useful media that played a large part in the attacks were Periscope, which had multiple streams up to record the many people fleeing from different locations, and twitter, as always. BBC included hashtags as a part of their report, to show how the attacks were spreading on social media. All in all, it looked like the media that was used was relevant, helpful, and in good taste in covering such a terrible tragedy.
John Boehner announced that he was resigning at the end of the month, and WTNH covered this breaking news as soon as it was announced. They had the article itself as well as a video announcement from Boehner. There was almost no extra multimedia usage outside of the normal. Of course, as usual, WTNH made sure to tweet multiple links to the articles they wrote as well as broke it on facebook. The interesting thing they did was compile and write multiple articles about the resignation, tweeting posting on facebook and included videos. For example, there were articles about reactions from his fellow members of congress as well as there was a reflective article on his defining moments as speaker.
One thing I definitely think would have been useful in covering this story is charts, recalling his votes and opinions, as well as creatively summarizing his impact as the speaker. It could help make his impact succinct and more approachable. Young people would also appreciate the charts, as they respond well to different media. Personally, I would like that because I am not entirely sure or aware of what Boehner did in his term, and could make it clearer why this decision comes as a shock. Another interesting element could be a map showing a progression of where and how Boehner was elected and progressed from someone who was likely a local politician to one of the most important politicians in the country. A progression like that could show that even if you think the speaker is unapproachable or somewhat intimidating, he was once just a local guy. To make the story more local, you could possibly interview someone in his hometown that elected him to his first elected position. Go to his hometown, show the place, and show that he came from humble beginnings and cover where he used to serve. I feel this could make him more human and can also put certain decisions in perspective. Periscope is something I had never heard of before this class and probably something I would not have heard of for a long time if I hadn't taken this class. It really does just seem like twitter for videos, and the fact that the videos disappear after 24 hours raise some questions, like does Periscope have the servers to handles these videos? Or do they not see the value in preserving these videos? Obviously posters can keep their own videos but where is the value in that if nobody else can see them? It is odd to me.
Either way, the app is not really reaching a lot of major networks quite yet. As Professor Walker stated, it seems that only the more technologically savvy websites are using Periscope right now. However, even after following Mashable, Huffington Post, and AJ+, I received no notifications telling me that they were posting. Maybe that was an unfortunate miscommunication between my phone and the app, or maybe I screwed something up (which happens frequently enough that I would not be shocked). I will have to check the settings. That being said, I was lucky enough to be set up with one follower who posts on Periscope semi-frequently: The Pittsburgh Penguins of the NHL. I found it odd that my favorite hockey team has a Periscope up and running, but it was an interesting post. The video showed the third day of practices, with them doing line drills. It looked like the practice was open to the public to a degree as there was a crowd in the bleachers. However, it was not very filled. The video was from ice level, which seemed like a pretty exclusive view of the practices of a professional sports teams. After looking up a few other sports teams, it did not seem as if the app was too widespread, so I appreciated the use in general. As a whole, Periscope does help with getting up close and personal angles you would not otherwise have. On the field/court/ice views in sports are some of the most coveted of all, and Periscope provides a platform for that. Plus, seeing a practice does give some kind of an "inside view" on the team that I would not otherwise have. So, it does have its value in providing an insider view you would not otherwise see. The other post I saw was Motor Trend doing their "Car of the Year" video shoot for the Volkswagon Golf. Again, it provided the insider view that you would not otherwise have. It was interesting to see how stable the camera people could be while leaning their whole bodies outside of the sunroof. I can see where Periscope would have its value. On the scene, immediate, first hand views are rare, and Periscope provides a platform. I think it will grow and should grow. I can totally see myself using this in the future when I am involved in a large group event or happening, sporting events or otherwise. Snow Fall: The Avalanche at Tunnel Creek really is a fascinating piece of journalism, if not an accomplishment in immersion. I read the whole thing, though to be fair I was more just going over it after I got to "A Plan in Motion." I did skip around a good amount at first just to get a scope of the structure, as well as I scrolled to the bottom immediately. However, I feel I couldn't give it a truly fair assessment without reading it.
The formats used are not flashy and actually make the story better. The header with the small amount of snow blowing immediately sets the mood for the article. You can almost hear the low howl of the sprinkles as they went with the breeze. The pictures used were only used to make a less clear aspect visual. Using a video interview in a written piece is interesting but it only furthers the story. The graphic of the mountains, I think, is fantastic. It helps clearly visualize exactly what happened, and helps show the scope and size of the mountains. It immerses you in the story better than a description probably could, no matter how good the writing is. They may not be necessary, but they help convey the story better. Using a typical format makes the story much less interesting. I probably would not read it, partially because why should I care about this avalanche, but partially because it's covered in advertisements and pop ups. It's unattractive, and somewhat invasive, for a descriptive story. It ruins the immersion that this story sets out to accomplish. I would not get past the first paragraph in a standard format. Personally, the only thing I would have done differently is make it shorter. It gets to a point where it's like, "Alright get to the conclusion." That being said, it is an accomplishment in itself to cover a story like this so in depth and so fully. To take the story, and format it with modern graphics, methods, and ideas, makes it a special piece that other writers should strive to match. It's very clear Branch is a talented writer, and the idea makes a story that I would not otherwise read, a story that I am fascinated by. There are some pretty clear differences between WTNH and ESPN. For example, WTNH seems to only post hard news and stories. ESPN, on the other hand, is very active about live scores and lighter stuff, as well as the hard news. As is the essence of sports, ESPN also posts speculative and analysis pieces. On Twitter, WTNH tweets a lead and then a bit link to their story. ESPN takes a little more casual approach to tweets, as well as tweeting facts and sometimes pictures of relevant athletes. In terms of comparison, WTNH is very similar to its twitter in tweeting news. On ESPN’s facebook ,they post mostly hard news, as opposed to the twitter which covers a lot more light stories and fun random stories.
Broadcasts are different between the text and video of a story on ESPN. Usually the video is related; something like an analysis of the same topic from an ESPN show such as SportsCenter. Also, quick recommendation, STOP WITH AUTOPLAY VIDEOS. It helps nobody, ESPN. Especially with auto-playing play list, because the next video is usually unrelated. In WTNH’s case, the broadcast matches video news to print news, but they do not simply post the script of the broadcast. When it comes to WTNH’s website, it essentially does exactly what you would want from a news network. It tells the news. It is not flashy and does not really force anything. ESPN’s is a little different. As someone who has been using the website for a long time, I know where to look and how it works. That being said, it is incredibly crowded and almost unusable. There’s too much going on and it is hard to find anything. Thankfully, the search feature functions well, but it is still incredibly confusing. I almost exclusively use the app now, which is also a struggle to use in terms of loading time and crashing. In terms of recommendations, WTNH: do not use that background banner on your site. That’s wasted real estate. ESPN, de-clutter, please, because that website went from approachable to atrocious overnight. Otherwise, WTNH and ESPN do essentially what they need. WTNH covers hard news objectively. ESPN covers sports and can keep it light, but also posts hard news where it needs to. Overall, they do a fine job of accomplishing an online presence. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |