Good design can be difficult because much of it is preference-based. I think we see this a lot with magazines and Web sites more than we do with newspapers. Magazines and Web sites are much more niche-marketed, so their design needs to appeal to their readers. Of course, there are also basic news Web sites, which tend to have pretty straight-forward, basic layouts.
Personally, I appreciate simplicity more than anything else. The worst Web sites are like some of the examples Olga showed us in class - completely over done and impossible to navigate. It’s tempting to want to use every feature available, but that’s not a good idea. A visually abrasive design will get rid of an audience faster than anything else.
In terms of good site design, I think the first and most important component, as Olga mentioned, is that from first glance the reader can tell what your site is about. Second in importance is that the site is easy to navigate – that the reader can access the information your site is trying to provide in an easy way.
Showing posts with label Lauren Zima. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lauren Zima. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Flash Journalism - Lauren Zima
I think flash journalism provides so many opportunities to get a reader involved in a story. Studies have shown that the more readers are involved in something, the more information they retain from it. Flash projects will get the reader involved; the reader can click and navigate through them, leading them from one step to the next, and revealing something with each click. The reader is visually stimulated by flash journalism, and this is key.
However, I do feel that there can be too much of a good thing. A site overloaded with flash will turn readers off. Much like there is balance in a solid story, there must be balance of how much of these interactive tools we are using. The brain can be overstimulated as easily as it can be understimulated.
I do think that flash is missing some components that I find interesting, such as video and sound. But, I think it has a lot of capabilities to provide simple and limited amounts of information in an easy fashion. So, depending on your goal in using flash, it can be ideal.
However, I do feel that there can be too much of a good thing. A site overloaded with flash will turn readers off. Much like there is balance in a solid story, there must be balance of how much of these interactive tools we are using. The brain can be overstimulated as easily as it can be understimulated.
I do think that flash is missing some components that I find interesting, such as video and sound. But, I think it has a lot of capabilities to provide simple and limited amounts of information in an easy fashion. So, depending on your goal in using flash, it can be ideal.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Writing for a Visual Medium - Lauren Zima
I found the poynter article very helpful - especially the ideas about keeping writing succinct and the "story in a sentence" concept. We can see these ideas in daily news coverage.
In our studies of journalism at Mizzou, I think we sometimes we ignore the more frivolous, but popular, ares of journalism such as entertainment journalism. Personally, I follow celebrity news (as well as other news) daily, and there's a lot of money to be made in that realm. People magazine is the #1 magazine in the U.S. The point is, we ignore this area of journalism, but it can be a difficult area to write for (writing must be snappy and clever) and some of the best writing for visual mediums is found in entertainment journalism because it is such a visual field. On people.com for example, every day reporters are given new photos and/or video of celebrities to put on the site/in the magazine. They have to come up with short quips that provide context about what the celebrity is doing as well as information about the celebrity's current life. Here's one example from a photo of actor Patrick Dempsey:
DRESSED TO IMPRESS
Looking sharp! His Grey's Anatomy character may be a mess, but Patrick Dempsey lives up to his McDreamy title, suiting up for a photo shoot in Los Angeles on Saturday.
As the article touched on, I think the key to writing for a visual medium is to add context to the visual in an interesting way. There's no point in writing if it doesn't add anything to the photo. In this instance, the caption could've simply read "Patrick Dempsey in Los Angeles", but the reader learned from the in-depth caption, and the caption kept the reader's interest because it was succinct and fun.
In our studies of journalism at Mizzou, I think we sometimes we ignore the more frivolous, but popular, ares of journalism such as entertainment journalism. Personally, I follow celebrity news (as well as other news) daily, and there's a lot of money to be made in that realm. People magazine is the #1 magazine in the U.S. The point is, we ignore this area of journalism, but it can be a difficult area to write for (writing must be snappy and clever) and some of the best writing for visual mediums is found in entertainment journalism because it is such a visual field. On people.com for example, every day reporters are given new photos and/or video of celebrities to put on the site/in the magazine. They have to come up with short quips that provide context about what the celebrity is doing as well as information about the celebrity's current life. Here's one example from a photo of actor Patrick Dempsey:
DRESSED TO IMPRESS
Looking sharp! His Grey's Anatomy character may be a mess, but Patrick Dempsey lives up to his McDreamy title, suiting up for a photo shoot in Los Angeles on Saturday.
As the article touched on, I think the key to writing for a visual medium is to add context to the visual in an interesting way. There's no point in writing if it doesn't add anything to the photo. In this instance, the caption could've simply read "Patrick Dempsey in Los Angeles", but the reader learned from the in-depth caption, and the caption kept the reader's interest because it was succinct and fun.
KBIA Story - Lauren Zima
I enjoyed the KBIA "Neuticles" story. I thought there was some really clever writing ("the cadillac of dog testicles costs 900 bones") and that the reporter got some awesome quotes (the guy talking about how one person put the testicles on his alligator, how mostly male pet owners and extreme pet owners buy these things, etc.). I would've liked a little more natural sound, but I understand that there might not have been many options other than dogs barking, which the story had.
I also tried to examine KBIA's coverage on Columbia's police chief candidates, "Columbia Residents Meet Police Chief Candidates." Personally, I found the coverage boring. There was a short intro paragraph which explained that the candidates had just had their first round of interviews, then listed each candidate's name and where they were from. Following this paragraph was a recording of each candidate's interview. I suppose having the recordings is useful to some and definitely provides depth, but I find it hard to believe that many people are sitting at their computers listening to each candidate's interview in its entirety. I could see adding these interviews as extras to a more central story, but a more central story wasn't available.
I expected more on the Web from KBIA, but could find very few audio clips of stories that had run on the air. I tried to listen to the podcasts but needed to have a subscription. Perhaps the Web site was just difficult to navigate, but I expected more.
I also tried to examine KBIA's coverage on Columbia's police chief candidates, "Columbia Residents Meet Police Chief Candidates." Personally, I found the coverage boring. There was a short intro paragraph which explained that the candidates had just had their first round of interviews, then listed each candidate's name and where they were from. Following this paragraph was a recording of each candidate's interview. I suppose having the recordings is useful to some and definitely provides depth, but I find it hard to believe that many people are sitting at their computers listening to each candidate's interview in its entirety. I could see adding these interviews as extras to a more central story, but a more central story wasn't available.
I expected more on the Web from KBIA, but could find very few audio clips of stories that had run on the air. I tried to listen to the podcasts but needed to have a subscription. Perhaps the Web site was just difficult to navigate, but I expected more.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Journalistic Video Example - Lauren Zima
I regularly visit cnn.com,which often has both video and text for stories, but rarely both for one story. I watched this video on a woman who won a $50,000 lottery jackpot after being fired from her job. I think this story could have been conveyed just as powerfully in text except for one element: its location. The video was full of colorful, bright casino shots, and many of the shots had lots of movement, such as the slots machines. The location made the story, though its subject matter wasn't particularly visually interesting, very visually appealing.
I then looked at another story, which had both video and text with it. This was the story of an outbreak of chaos at an America's Next Top Model (a reality show) casting call. The story itself is screaming for visuals; it's about a mob scene in which six people were injured. CNN was simply lucky that a freelance photographer was near the scene and shot some footage from a roof, because the text in no way captures the same reaction that video - both the visual and the sound of the screaming mob - captures. I would've liked to see this entire story done as a video, but again, CNN was lucky to get any footage at all. That 53-second video is currently the most-read (most clicked on) story on the site. This story also has potential video because Tyra Banks, the supermodel, produces and hosts the reality show. An on-camera interview with a celebrity would've added interest to the story.
Ultimately, video is harder and more time-consuming to produce than a text story, especially under the time constraints of urgent news. So, in my opinion, video on the Internet should be saved for either stories where the time constraints aren't as urgent (such as the woman winning the lottery) or for when there is a major reason that visual appeal would add to the story (the chaotic scene of the casting call).
I then looked at another story, which had both video and text with it. This was the story of an outbreak of chaos at an America's Next Top Model (a reality show) casting call. The story itself is screaming for visuals; it's about a mob scene in which six people were injured. CNN was simply lucky that a freelance photographer was near the scene and shot some footage from a roof, because the text in no way captures the same reaction that video - both the visual and the sound of the screaming mob - captures. I would've liked to see this entire story done as a video, but again, CNN was lucky to get any footage at all. That 53-second video is currently the most-read (most clicked on) story on the site. This story also has potential video because Tyra Banks, the supermodel, produces and hosts the reality show. An on-camera interview with a celebrity would've added interest to the story.
Ultimately, video is harder and more time-consuming to produce than a text story, especially under the time constraints of urgent news. So, in my opinion, video on the Internet should be saved for either stories where the time constraints aren't as urgent (such as the woman winning the lottery) or for when there is a major reason that visual appeal would add to the story (the chaotic scene of the casting call).
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Staging Video/Video Ethics - Lauren Zima
It seems obvious that staging video is ethically wrong. Much like staging a photograph, it is not a representation of the truth. A staged video is a movie, not a news story; it's the difference between the New York Times website and funnyordie.com.
What's a touchier subject to me is video editing. Much like the issues behind changing a photo (for color, light, sharpness, etc.) or editing a quotation ('do we include how many times this person said 'like'"?), the path gets trickier with video editing. If one person was given five video clips and told to put them together as a story in any way they wanted, and another person was told to do the same, I have no doubt that those stories would end up different. Editing video cleverly is how the most successful reality shows are made. So, how do we edit ethically?
To me, the most useful, most basic tool of good journalism will always be mutual monitoring. Ask a co-worker what they think of an issue - talk to your editor. Of course we should all know the basics of good ethics, but it is when we get too wrapped up in our own heads that we get confused. Just as objectivity is important to journalism - an objective, outside point of view is a gauge on ethics.
What's a touchier subject to me is video editing. Much like the issues behind changing a photo (for color, light, sharpness, etc.) or editing a quotation ('do we include how many times this person said 'like'"?), the path gets trickier with video editing. If one person was given five video clips and told to put them together as a story in any way they wanted, and another person was told to do the same, I have no doubt that those stories would end up different. Editing video cleverly is how the most successful reality shows are made. So, how do we edit ethically?
To me, the most useful, most basic tool of good journalism will always be mutual monitoring. Ask a co-worker what they think of an issue - talk to your editor. Of course we should all know the basics of good ethics, but it is when we get too wrapped up in our own heads that we get confused. Just as objectivity is important to journalism - an objective, outside point of view is a gauge on ethics.
Pictures of the Year Story - Lauren Zima
I watched the National Geographic multimedia story on gorillas in the Congo. I was incredibly moved by this piece. The subject matter, the plight of these gorillas, was matched by the use of different elements to tell the story (still photos, music, interviews, maps, text.) Some of the highlights:
-Still photos of gorillas moving through the foliage were shown in sequence and interspersed with drum music (assumedly African, which is appropriate to the region.) This was incredibly powerful because the jarring changes from picture to picture matched the beating of the drums.
-A still photo of a man sitting with a gorilla stayed on screen for several seconds. This allowed viewers to take in the image - to take in how close this man was to this gorilla and how the relationship between them was peaceful and mature, not violent or animalistic. It was remarkable.
-National Geographic photographers were interviewed for the story. At first, I was a bit taken aback by this; wasn't it teetering on the rules of bias? But - who better to tell the story than the photographers who had followed it for years? They knew the story.
-Photos were shown of dead gorillas, with the photographers telling the story [of how the gorillas died and how the park rangers found them and buried them] playing over the photos. I think the photos were much more powerful than video footage would have been, especially because the photographers told the story over the photos. In the photos, it's clear that the park rangers looking over the gorillas are sad, but silent in their grief. The photographers gave them a voice, which gave the pictures power that video footage would not have had. Additionally, the still photos of the dead gorillas were astonishing because, lying sprawled out on the ground instead of crouched on all fours, their bodies looked incredibly human.
There were moments when I was a bit confused by time elements; I wasn't sure when everything was supposed to be happening and I wasn't entirely sure of the focus of the story. But, the plight of the gorillas was showcased in the story of what happened over a few nights. I would have watched a full-length documentary on this story - the project was that good.
-dead gorilla photos
-confused by time
-Still photos of gorillas moving through the foliage were shown in sequence and interspersed with drum music (assumedly African, which is appropriate to the region.) This was incredibly powerful because the jarring changes from picture to picture matched the beating of the drums.
-A still photo of a man sitting with a gorilla stayed on screen for several seconds. This allowed viewers to take in the image - to take in how close this man was to this gorilla and how the relationship between them was peaceful and mature, not violent or animalistic. It was remarkable.
-National Geographic photographers were interviewed for the story. At first, I was a bit taken aback by this; wasn't it teetering on the rules of bias? But - who better to tell the story than the photographers who had followed it for years? They knew the story.
-Photos were shown of dead gorillas, with the photographers telling the story [of how the gorillas died and how the park rangers found them and buried them] playing over the photos. I think the photos were much more powerful than video footage would have been, especially because the photographers told the story over the photos. In the photos, it's clear that the park rangers looking over the gorillas are sad, but silent in their grief. The photographers gave them a voice, which gave the pictures power that video footage would not have had. Additionally, the still photos of the dead gorillas were astonishing because, lying sprawled out on the ground instead of crouched on all fours, their bodies looked incredibly human.
There were moments when I was a bit confused by time elements; I wasn't sure when everything was supposed to be happening and I wasn't entirely sure of the focus of the story. But, the plight of the gorillas was showcased in the story of what happened over a few nights. I would have watched a full-length documentary on this story - the project was that good.
-dead gorilla photos
-confused by time
Photography Readings - Lauren Zima
It seems to be that, even between journalists, the grass is always greener. LaBelle seems plagued by the search for the perfect picture, the quest to capture a moment - the chance to be there to glimpse and record a baby's smile or a soldier's tears. I've never considered myself a photographer because I don't think I have the eye for it. Yet, I also thought photography was somehow easier; a writer must search to find the perfect person for a story, then work to get that person to open up to the writer. But a photographer, I thought, just has to be there - they just have to snap a photo.
I can see that I was wrong. I know far too little to make this guesstimate but I now see that within every 100 photos, there's one good one - maybe. And of course, that natural eye is so important.
David Snider's pictures were breathtaking. I think I underestimated what it takes for a person to let a photographer into his/her life as well. Snider's pictures were out in the open, but it must take so much for someone to let a photographer follow him/her around; a good picture can be so much more powerful and hard-hitting than words.
Ultimately, it seems that both writers and photographers must have that same observing eye; that same keen sense of curiosity and wonder about the world. We're all journalists, after all.
I can see that I was wrong. I know far too little to make this guesstimate but I now see that within every 100 photos, there's one good one - maybe. And of course, that natural eye is so important.
David Snider's pictures were breathtaking. I think I underestimated what it takes for a person to let a photographer into his/her life as well. Snider's pictures were out in the open, but it must take so much for someone to let a photographer follow him/her around; a good picture can be so much more powerful and hard-hitting than words.
Ultimately, it seems that both writers and photographers must have that same observing eye; that same keen sense of curiosity and wonder about the world. We're all journalists, after all.
Backpack Journalism - Lauren Zima
I don't think that being a "jack of all trades" makes a journalist suffer. If a journalist has mastered the key, basic elements of journalism: listening, observing, showing (not telling), etc., that journalist's work will be solid. Though technology is changing, good journalism isn't. For example: good writing is good writing, whether it's in a newspaper or online.
To me, the reason backpack journalists are looked down upon, looked at as lacking, is because of the lack of value placed on news today. The foreign editor for USA Today once told a class I was in that the old adage was that newspapers should cost as much as a cup of coffee, and that we'd lost that. It's true: coffee at Starbucks is $4 or $5. Our society doesn't place enough value on the news, so not enough money is going into the news, so newspapers must costs, so they don't have enough money to give journalists the time it takes to put together a good story. That's why journalism suffers, not because a journalist's technological versatility, and journalists must be technologically versatile in order to survive. It's a vicious circle of unanswered questions.
To me, the reason backpack journalists are looked down upon, looked at as lacking, is because of the lack of value placed on news today. The foreign editor for USA Today once told a class I was in that the old adage was that newspapers should cost as much as a cup of coffee, and that we'd lost that. It's true: coffee at Starbucks is $4 or $5. Our society doesn't place enough value on the news, so not enough money is going into the news, so newspapers must costs, so they don't have enough money to give journalists the time it takes to put together a good story. That's why journalism suffers, not because a journalist's technological versatility, and journalists must be technologically versatile in order to survive. It's a vicious circle of unanswered questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)