Course Registration is underway this semester as underclassmen prepare for the fall 2009 Academic Year. During this time, many students and faculty are using words such as ‘unit’ and ‘credit’. Albright uses a course unit system as opposed to a course credit system that can be found at many large and state universities. This system is not often discussed around campus yet many members of the Albright community possess varying opinions on the issue. Albright Registrar, Dave Ballaban, and Professor of English, Dr. Richard Androne, provide commentary on this issue and a student perspective is provided by Freshmen Becky Kinkead and Stephanie Babson as well as Seniors Frantz Armand and Chelsey Gross.
For more information on the course unit system used by Albright or the credit system used at other schools you can e-mail Albright’s Resistrar, Dave Ballaban, at dballaban@alb.edu, or visit the Registrar’s office Monday through Friday.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Can you tell me how to get, how to get, to the Writing Center?
Under the guidance of Dr. Melissa Nicholas, the new director of the Albright College Writing Center, there has been an attempt to make the center a more vital and respected part of the Albright campus. Beginning with her taking over the reigns in the spring semester 2009, Dr. Nicolas has attempted to help the Albright campus realize that the Writing Center is not a "fix it" shop, but a place where students are encouraged to receive help and guidance with their papers to become better writers. It has been a transition that has not been easy, but with the help of an interim class helping students to learn how to become better tutors AND writers, the Writing Center is well on its way. I interview two tutors at the Writing Center, senior Christine Phillips, who has been working at the center since 2007, before Dr. Nicolas arrived, and Meghan Wheeler, who joined this semester, after taking Dr. Nicolas' interim class, Dave Smith, a freshman, who is a frequent Writing Center visitor, and Dr. Nicolas.
Journalism: keeping up with the changes
I spoke to Deborah Horan, a journalist previously working with the Chicago Tribune who spoke at the "Changing media landscape and careers in journalism" experience event that took place Monday March 30, 2009. I also spoke to Dr. Jon Bekken, associate professor of communications, Brandon Ruppert, a senior communication major and Tyler Parmer, a freshman communication and business major to gain their insight on how the field of communications and journalism is changing.
To gain more insight from a faculty professor you can email Dr. Jon Bekken, Assoicate professor of communication at jbekken@alb.edu.
To gain more insight from a faculty professor you can email Dr. Jon Bekken, Assoicate professor of communication at jbekken@alb.edu.
Housing Selection Follow-Up
The Housing Office side of the arguement. Because of complication of dates the previous post of the Housing Selection for Fall 2009 did not provide Housing an oppurtunity to speak out. This post, with an interview with Amanda Hanincick the Housing Director, gives Housing the oppurtunity to be heard.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
AC Gospel Ensemble Members Speak Out on The Importance of Spirituality on Campus, Choir Experiences and Their Road to Building Relationships with God
The members of the Albright College Gospel Ensemble come together every week to do one thing—praise God through song. I sat down with three members, Brittany McLaughlin (the president), Adrie Neal (choir director) and Antoine Stroman (SGA representative) about their relationships with God, the difficulties of temptation and the importance in being members of the choir.
For more information:
http://www.albright.edu/campuslife/clubs_and_orgs/GospelEnsemble.html
And don't forget to check out the Albright College Gospel Ensemble Spring Showcase MAY 3RD!
For more information:
http://www.albright.edu/campuslife/clubs_and_orgs/GospelEnsemble.html
And don't forget to check out the Albright College Gospel Ensemble Spring Showcase MAY 3RD!
The Few, the Proud, Albright College Supports the Yellow Ribbon Veterans' Award
Albright College's new Yellow Ribbon Veterans' Award will allow qualified veterans of the U.S. Armed Services to earn an Albright degree free of cost. The Post-9/11 GI Bill and the Yellow Ribbon GI Education Enhancement Program provide subsidies to veterans who have served at least 36 months of active duty after September 11, 2001. I interviewed Mary Ellen Duffy, Director of Financial Aid, Greg Eichhorn, Vice President for Enrollment Management and Dean of Admission and Kathy Cafoncelli, Executive Assistant to the President. I also interviewed Junior, CJ Jewell and Senior, Kim Thompson to get the students perspective.
To find out more information visit http://www.albright.edu/ or call 610-921-7799 or 888-253-8851.
To find out more information visit http://www.albright.edu/ or call 610-921-7799 or 888-253-8851.
Experience: More Than Just an Event
Albright College is a liberal arts school, which focuses on broadening the knowledge of students in many areas. A way Albright feels this is beneficial is making a requirement of experience events in order to graduate. There are some students that believe this is beneficial and some that think it is pointless. While listening to this interview baseball player and SAE member LJ Robinson, commuter Roxy Rothermel, senior Valerie Busz, and Experience Event Coordinator Gerald Ronning inform you of their opinions of experience events at Albright.
For more information or suggestions on experience events feel free to contact Professor Gerald Ronning at (610)-921-7716 or visit him in Masters Hall Rm. 107.
For more information or suggestions on experience events feel free to contact Professor Gerald Ronning at (610)-921-7716 or visit him in Masters Hall Rm. 107.
An American Journalist's Experience In Iraq
On Tuesday, March 31, 2009, award winning journalist Deborah Horan spoke at Albright College about her time as an American journalist covering the war in Iraq. Horan talked about her struggles to find reliable information to report in a war struck country. Professor Gerald Ronning, chair of the experience event program, gives his opinion on the turnout of the event and whether the war in Iraq is still an issue that resonates with students. Albright students Katie Donaldson and Mitch Nathan, who attended Horan's speech, give their opinions on Horan's experience and the on-going issues with Iraq.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Nytimes.com - 4th Hour Critique
For this critique I chose to look at nytimes.com which is based on the major national traditional print publication, The New York Times. It’s been a while since I’ve gone to this particular web site and I found myself looking at it differently based on a lot of the things we’ve gone over in class. One of the first strengths of the site that I found was its incorporation of various media. We talk a lot about that practice in conjunction with blogging, and I started to take for granted that the use of multimedia on a site was unique to it. I was pleasantly surprised to notice that nytimes.com used the practice as well. Before this class it was probably not something I would have taken the time to focus on, but now I’ve realized how much the use of different media can add to a news site. On the home page alone there are videos posted, as well as links to other stories based on the current story posted, slideshows, and audio. As you go deeper into the site clicking on various tabs or topics, the use of multimedia is carried on demonstrating that the site uses the practice for all of its stories and not just the home page.
I found one particular article that seemed to encompass many different forms of media within it, ‘Foreign Ways and War Scars Test Hospital’. The article is part of a series called Remade in America: A series about the newest immigrants and their impact on American institutions. The article had a basic written story, a video, a slideshow, several images including charts and graphs, as well as links to outside sources to explain certain things that were discussed in the text. After taking the time to read or look at all the multimedia options the article presented I feel like I know a lot more about the issue than before. I liked that I was able to get the information in many different ways because I focused on different things and picked up on different things depending on which media I was engaging with. For example, when I read the text I focused a lot more on the facts that were being presented, when I watched the video I focused a lot on the viewpoints of the subjects of the article, and when I looked at pictures I focused on the emotional aspect of the piece. In that respect I really enjoyed the use of multimedia in a story. I felt like I really got a lot out of the article.
However, there were some things that I didn’t like. I found that the story started to get very repetitive. The same facts were presented in each different use of media with the exception of the charts and graphs. I would have liked to see different angles of the story or an expansion of something discussed in the written text. I think that would help readers get more out of the story than they do. But that criticism is also a double edged sword because I also feel like the use of multimedia makes it easy for readers who don’t have the time or don’t care to explore all the different media to pick a format that they enjoy most and get the information that way. In that sense I think it is a good thing that the same information is presented in each form of media.
This use of multimedia to present information isn’t something that can be seen in traditional print. Even though there were a few things that I didn’t like about nytimes.com’s use of different media, I firmly believe that it gave news a lot more dimension than can be found in print. The Newswars videos that we watched pointed out that today’s consumers of media like to ‘infosnack’ and take in media in small doses in ways that most appeal to them. The online version of The New York Times allows users to choose how they get their news and overall I think they’re doing a good job at it. I personally don’t seek out news very often but I know that when I do in the future, an online news source is probably how I’m going to do it because of the many ways I can choose to get the information.
The Philadelphia Inquirer: A Little Too Much Clutter
Long ago, when I was just a young girl, my parents used my make me read the newspaper with them, to help my literacy skills. It was my responsibility everyday to buy the Philadelphia Daily News everyday after school; my mom would give me an extra $3.00 every week, so that I could by the (at the time) 60 cent paper, Monday through Friday. I would read it on the train on the way home from school, turn it over to my parents, and after they read it, we would discuss a couple of articles from it. On Saturday, I was released from my duties, and usually my dad would get it, and I felt like I had more important things to do with my Saturdays than to read any paper. But Sunday?! Sunday became my favorite day to read the newspaper, and still is, but it never was the Daily News, but the Philadelphia Inquirer. Yes, this paper came out on the other days of the week too, but my father liked the Daily News better Monday-Saturday, but the bulkiness of the Sunday edition, so we would get it on Sundays. I always loved the plethora of sections, filled with local news, international news, circulars, magazines, dining reviews (which for some reason, I faithfully read, as if I really knew what some of the foods were), and my personal favorite, the comics. Since I now am in Reading for the majority of my time, I hardly ever get to read to Inquirer anymore, but its still my favorite newspaper, and naturally, I chose its website for my post.
On the newspaper’s website, it is easily to tell that it isn’t an over-the-top fancy website. Its very simple, very similar to the actual paper; it is mostly white with the titles of the articles in blue. It has a couple of pictures on the sides of the site, but not very many, and it seems like they are simply for the article that is headlining the site. There is a section for videos and pictures, however, that gives pictures that are in the daily edition of the pictures, but obviously, the reader would have to click on that separately. Each type of news, like business, sports, and dining, is split up in to small categories, and scattered on the page, and is also outlined at the top of the page in red, which I assumed was to make it easier for the reader to find a particular section. It has a breaking news section, which has articles and stories, that obviously happened after the printing of the paper; one was as recent as 1:28, and it was 1:35 when I went on the site. The one thing that surprised me, and I actually found to be interesting was the “Online Extras” that the site offered. One of them was called the “Interactive Map”, which allowed people to map and trace homicides that have happened in Philadelphia since 1988; with the increase of the crime rate in Philadelphia over the last few years, I found it to be not only surprising that it would be up there, but in a way, helpful too, as an effort to curb the homicides, but letting people see the effect visually. The red dots that littered the map, certainly scared ME.
When I clicked on an article, one that was about 69th street, an outdoor shopping strip, and a popular alternative to Center City Philadelphia, which I happen to live close to, I was pleasantly surprised at the length of the article. I assumed that it would be a short and concise blurb taken from the article that was published in the paper. But judging from the length (3 pages), it probably was directly from the paper. However, even though its clear that I could read a large number of the articles from the printed paper, on the website, I realized that I still like the printed version better. I like how everything is spread out more, in contrast to the bunched design of the website. The paper simply is more aesthetically pleasing, with the large headlines, the more organized flow of everything. And of course, I don’t have to click on the headline to read the article with a printed paper, which may seem a small task, but I prefer to just read the article rather than having to be taken to another part just to see that, then click out of it, and go back to the homepage, and do the same for the next article. I find the fact that the Inquirer has such a website to be great, and it may work for some people who prefer this type of news, but me? I’ll spend my 75 cents and read it on the train, like old times.
On the newspaper’s website, it is easily to tell that it isn’t an over-the-top fancy website. Its very simple, very similar to the actual paper; it is mostly white with the titles of the articles in blue. It has a couple of pictures on the sides of the site, but not very many, and it seems like they are simply for the article that is headlining the site. There is a section for videos and pictures, however, that gives pictures that are in the daily edition of the pictures, but obviously, the reader would have to click on that separately. Each type of news, like business, sports, and dining, is split up in to small categories, and scattered on the page, and is also outlined at the top of the page in red, which I assumed was to make it easier for the reader to find a particular section. It has a breaking news section, which has articles and stories, that obviously happened after the printing of the paper; one was as recent as 1:28, and it was 1:35 when I went on the site. The one thing that surprised me, and I actually found to be interesting was the “Online Extras” that the site offered. One of them was called the “Interactive Map”, which allowed people to map and trace homicides that have happened in Philadelphia since 1988; with the increase of the crime rate in Philadelphia over the last few years, I found it to be not only surprising that it would be up there, but in a way, helpful too, as an effort to curb the homicides, but letting people see the effect visually. The red dots that littered the map, certainly scared ME.
When I clicked on an article, one that was about 69th street, an outdoor shopping strip, and a popular alternative to Center City Philadelphia, which I happen to live close to, I was pleasantly surprised at the length of the article. I assumed that it would be a short and concise blurb taken from the article that was published in the paper. But judging from the length (3 pages), it probably was directly from the paper. However, even though its clear that I could read a large number of the articles from the printed paper, on the website, I realized that I still like the printed version better. I like how everything is spread out more, in contrast to the bunched design of the website. The paper simply is more aesthetically pleasing, with the large headlines, the more organized flow of everything. And of course, I don’t have to click on the headline to read the article with a printed paper, which may seem a small task, but I prefer to just read the article rather than having to be taken to another part just to see that, then click out of it, and go back to the homepage, and do the same for the next article. I find the fact that the Inquirer has such a website to be great, and it may work for some people who prefer this type of news, but me? I’ll spend my 75 cents and read it on the train, like old times.
The New York Times Website: Minimalist Style
I often visit the New York Times website Style section to get updates on fashion events and news and also to watch the audio slide show that Bill Cunningham posts about trends appearing in major cities. The style section of the website is easy to get to since it has a section tab at the top of the New York Times homepage. The content on the website is great. It is credible, and holds up to all the standards that the rest of the New York Times website sections as well as the content of the print paper. The articles in the style section always relate other aspects that one might not consider which in turn makes the articles well rounded. I like the audio slide shows presentation because it is a visual version of an article. The only downside to the audio slide show is that they do not have a comments section on it. There is a feedback link at the bottom of the audio slide show box; that link pulls up an email server so the audience can make email comments. But the comments are not displayed anywhere visible. The style section is split into different sections and each section has a feature article and then links to other articles that were printed in that section for the day. I like that the page is kept to a minimalist style. Visually it makes it easier to look through the page because it is not bombarded with links, articles and photographs. In a way it is smart that they have their site set up this way because it forces the audience to navigate through the different sections of the site to get to different articles. The style section also gives the audience a search portion where audiences can find restaurants in New York City, directly from the dinning & wine section of the style page. That function is placed in a great spot since audiences that would be reading articles related to food and wine would like to know where restaurants are located. The Style Magazine section of the style page is also helpful because although I don’t have a subscription to the style magazine I would still like to know what the content is of the current issue, and perhaps if there is a certain spread or topic discussed in the style magazine by being exposed to it on the style page I might be inclined to buy the magazine. With the exception of the lack of audience participation I think that the style page of the New York Times website is very easy to navigate. It provides all the information that an audience who is interested in the section would want while presenting it in a minimalist style.
The New York Times Online
The New York Times is one of the most popular major newspapers. The New York Times has been around for a number of years. I will be honest and say that I have never visited this site until today. Just skimming over the page I find that there are a large number of different topics ranging from Supreme Court appeals to a company’s bankruptcy to sports. Their website is just like there newspaper; full of information.
When you first visit the websites homepage you see that the title of the newspaper and site have the same font, which I think keeps the connection between the website and the paper. Under the title you have the date and then there are the articles. The one good thing I did find about The New York Times site is that with all the information they give you, you have to find something that intrigues you to read. Also on the left had side of the page is a list of topics that the website has which makes it easier for the reader to find what he or she wants to read about.
The website does not just have photographs of the story they are covering but it has videos that you can click on and watch. One thing that the New York Times does very well is balance the stories between the newspaper and the website. They still want people to read the paper and enjoy the articles that are in that, that may never have made it to the web.
The thing that I found I did not like about the website was how everything was bunched together. I do agree that they had a lot of information and most all of it seemed like very useful knowledge but they seem to compact it all and it was just too much for my eyes to look at. Due to all the cluttered articles I did not know where to click I felt like I was bombarded with information. In the end I find the Internet to be a great thing but I still prefer to pick up a newspaper to get my information.
When you first visit the websites homepage you see that the title of the newspaper and site have the same font, which I think keeps the connection between the website and the paper. Under the title you have the date and then there are the articles. The one good thing I did find about The New York Times site is that with all the information they give you, you have to find something that intrigues you to read. Also on the left had side of the page is a list of topics that the website has which makes it easier for the reader to find what he or she wants to read about.
The website does not just have photographs of the story they are covering but it has videos that you can click on and watch. One thing that the New York Times does very well is balance the stories between the newspaper and the website. They still want people to read the paper and enjoy the articles that are in that, that may never have made it to the web.
The thing that I found I did not like about the website was how everything was bunched together. I do agree that they had a lot of information and most all of it seemed like very useful knowledge but they seem to compact it all and it was just too much for my eyes to look at. Due to all the cluttered articles I did not know where to click I felt like I was bombarded with information. In the end I find the Internet to be a great thing but I still prefer to pick up a newspaper to get my information.
Monday, March 30, 2009
USA Today Online: Good Content, Busy Design
For the online news source critique, first source that popped up in my head was USA Today. Since it’s my favorite newspaper, it was a no-brainer for me to critique it. USA Today strikes me differently than other newspapers because I appreciate the style of the writing and the fact that there is a section for everyone’s interest. Also, the articles always have interesting topics and always are appealing to me.
The website is designed in the same way that the paper is—everything is laid out in front of you. As soon as you get to the website, there are several stories that you can click on to read, videos, and pictures. Basically, the things that will immediately grab your attention. While, I understand their method of design, it is a little overwhelming to have so much jumping out at you. Even though it is constructed this way to gain your attention, it actually is distracting and makes it difficult to decide what to click on first. Because, there are videos, picture galleries and articles all existing in the same place, it is too much and makes it difficult to focus.
I noticed that the website included some of the features that we have discussed in class in the past couple of weeks. For example, the structure makes it a priority to integrate the opinions and voices of readers. On every article, there is space for readers to leave comments and “communities” where readers can join a group that focuses on a specific thing (for example, there are fantasy football, gossip and travel communities). Another feature from class is the fact that there are several blogs that USA Today sponsors and supports. This is significant because blogs are one of the biggest phenomenon online at the moment and to have this feature on the website will only increase their readership and popularity. Also, there are photo galleries and videos which are two mediums that represent a useful, current type of normality on websites today.
While, the content of the website is still informative and well-written, it’s the design I have a major issue with. I like the community ideas and blogs as well as the separating of section, like, travel, sports, money and entertainment. The content is some of the best out there—but how will people know if they cannot get through a messy, disorganized website?
The website is designed in the same way that the paper is—everything is laid out in front of you. As soon as you get to the website, there are several stories that you can click on to read, videos, and pictures. Basically, the things that will immediately grab your attention. While, I understand their method of design, it is a little overwhelming to have so much jumping out at you. Even though it is constructed this way to gain your attention, it actually is distracting and makes it difficult to decide what to click on first. Because, there are videos, picture galleries and articles all existing in the same place, it is too much and makes it difficult to focus.
I noticed that the website included some of the features that we have discussed in class in the past couple of weeks. For example, the structure makes it a priority to integrate the opinions and voices of readers. On every article, there is space for readers to leave comments and “communities” where readers can join a group that focuses on a specific thing (for example, there are fantasy football, gossip and travel communities). Another feature from class is the fact that there are several blogs that USA Today sponsors and supports. This is significant because blogs are one of the biggest phenomenon online at the moment and to have this feature on the website will only increase their readership and popularity. Also, there are photo galleries and videos which are two mediums that represent a useful, current type of normality on websites today.
While, the content of the website is still informative and well-written, it’s the design I have a major issue with. I like the community ideas and blogs as well as the separating of section, like, travel, sports, money and entertainment. The content is some of the best out there—but how will people know if they cannot get through a messy, disorganized website?
New York Times critique
The New York Times is one of the biggest and most popular print publications that exists. Their website as well is a wealth of information and gets just as much, if not more, traffic than the newspaper itself. The New York Times has been around for a very long time, and remains one the most-read newspapers in the country. Albright even has copies of the NY Times everyday in various buildings all over campus. Although this is a great opportunity that should be taken advantage of, many people still prefer to read online.
I have been to the NY Times website before, and have found it a useful source of information. When arriving this time, and looking at it analytically, I realized it is actually very cluttered, and the amount of information coming at you is almost overwhelming. However, I did notice that the website does update itself automatically without refreshing the page. This is a great way to stay up and current on the news, whereas with the newspaper, it only comes out once a day, and the stories there are the only ones you will get from the paper that day. The website is also good because you can search for particular news items or articles up at the top, and it gives you the options of Articles or Multimedia, and can pick the time period within which you wish to search.
The home page has all the headlines and important news, but if you scroll down the page there are also things like videos, which a newspaper would obviously not have. A newspaper is divided into sections, but there is a very easy navigation of subjects along the side, on which you can click, depending on what type of news you want to read. It will first give you the top news of the section, and then smaller or less popular articles underneath this. The website has many things that a newspaper does not incorporate, and many more articles than you would find in just one issue, including old articles. However, a website may not necessarily have all the articles that were published in the paper that day, or ever. The New York Times does not want its own website to put the newspaper out of business. A newspaper is something you can pick up almost anywhere and bring with you, while online access is not always available or convenient.
Personally, I would prefer to go online than pick up a newspaper any day. The website may seem cluttered at first, but it is easy to navigate, search, and find what you are looking for. You can find things from weeks ago, and the headlines and breaking news are constantly being updated. There is also a wide variety, from videos to articles to images, and many categories from which to choose.
I have been to the NY Times website before, and have found it a useful source of information. When arriving this time, and looking at it analytically, I realized it is actually very cluttered, and the amount of information coming at you is almost overwhelming. However, I did notice that the website does update itself automatically without refreshing the page. This is a great way to stay up and current on the news, whereas with the newspaper, it only comes out once a day, and the stories there are the only ones you will get from the paper that day. The website is also good because you can search for particular news items or articles up at the top, and it gives you the options of Articles or Multimedia, and can pick the time period within which you wish to search.
The home page has all the headlines and important news, but if you scroll down the page there are also things like videos, which a newspaper would obviously not have. A newspaper is divided into sections, but there is a very easy navigation of subjects along the side, on which you can click, depending on what type of news you want to read. It will first give you the top news of the section, and then smaller or less popular articles underneath this. The website has many things that a newspaper does not incorporate, and many more articles than you would find in just one issue, including old articles. However, a website may not necessarily have all the articles that were published in the paper that day, or ever. The New York Times does not want its own website to put the newspaper out of business. A newspaper is something you can pick up almost anywhere and bring with you, while online access is not always available or convenient.
Personally, I would prefer to go online than pick up a newspaper any day. The website may seem cluttered at first, but it is easy to navigate, search, and find what you are looking for. You can find things from weeks ago, and the headlines and breaking news are constantly being updated. There is also a wide variety, from videos to articles to images, and many categories from which to choose.
American Landscape: For Amber Waves of Song
I had never been to an Albright Choral Concert before this past Saturday, and I was slightly wary of the American Landscape theme, but I found the whole thing very enjoyable. I recognized almost all of the songs, and the program even provided lyrics for “The Star Spangled Banner” and “America the Beautiful.” This was a good event that was featured on Albright’s campus in Memorial Chapel. The conductor, Mr. Binger, even said that this was one of the biggest crowds that an Albright Choral Concert has had. There was a great mix of students, as well as family and friends from off-campus. The music had a good range that incorporated American history, and songs that went from slow and angelic to lively and upbeat. After the concert, I spoke with Mark Smith, a resident of Wyomissing, and a non-Albright student who came to support one of the singers and to enjoy the show. I also spoke with Fawn Lindsey, a freshman at Albright, who told me that this was her first choral concert as well. I was then able to speak with Heather Martell, a junior at Albright, who is part of the Women’s Choir. Through my own eyes and ears, and those of others, I was able to get a multitude of views on the concert that will hopefully encourage people to attend more of them in the future.
The Philadelphia Inquirer critique on leaving comments on a news story
For my critique I analyzed The Philadelphia Inquirer’s website. Overall, the website was easy to navigate. There were headlines and tabs which helped me find the stories I was interested in. The story I read was ‘Philadelphia Archdiocese to close two schools’. I chose this article because I attended Philadelphia Catholic school from first to twelfth grade and was curious to see what comments people left. When reading the article I noticed it was simple for readers to find the post a comment icon. On the right side of the article there was a separate box that included reader feedback, post a comment as well as a save and share section. In order for one to leave a comment it was not as easy as I would have thought. If one wanted to leave a comment about an article they first had to register and if they were already registered they had to sign in. To the left of the register box there is a comment from The Philadelphia Inquirer explaining why they are now asking people to register. Their reasoning is to increase the quality of the user experience and dialogue, as well as reduce the number of unsuitable or offensive comments (www.philly.com). I think making people register will decrease the number of people who would leave comments on a story. Commenting on a news story is something that is unique to the web. Readers can not leave comments for articles in newspapers so they post them on the Internet. I think because commenting is a distinctive feature to online media it should be easier to access and leave a comment. Today, people are always in a hurry so if they want to leave a comment they want to do it quickly. Many people do not want to have to log in and/or register. Also, if the website is only allowing certain comments to be posted the comments may be biased and non objective. Everyone I think should be able to leave comments without having to have user name to have peoples voices heard.
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20090330_Philadelphia_Archdiocese_to_close_two_schools.html#comments
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20090330_Philadelphia_Archdiocese_to_close_two_schools.html#comments
Was She Funny?
Michelle Buteua is a women who makes her living telling jokes. She is a comedian that had the chance to make her star appearance on Comedy Central and be able to travel the United States telling jokes. Michelle's show took place on Thursday March 26 at 8p.m. in Jake's Place. The question to look at is was she really funny. Jocelyn Smiley had a opinion that will shock you and Andrew Hettinger had an opinion that you would expect when someone talks about a comedian. So listen and enjoy.
People Magazine Critique
In all honesty this assignment could not come at a better time as I was debating with my friend the other day about what the purpose of buying People Magazine really is. People Magazine is a national print publication that focuses on the entertainment industry and also offers a website. My friend insists on buying the magazine because she says it has more information then the website. I, however, disagree because as a frequent reader of people.com I don’t see much of a difference in the magazine and the website. The biggest difference is that the magazine offers one or two feature stories about non-celebrity related stories. As a frequent reader of people.com I am a big fan of the website. However, I think the fact that they offer almost all the news they feature in their magazine on a daily basis hurts magazine circulation.
As soon as you click on the homepage for people.com all of the major entertainment stories from the day pop up with little blurbs underneath telling what each story is about. These stories are constantly updated throughout the day and the blurb helps visitors choose which stories they want to read. I think the blurbs offered lead to more “info snaking” because people can pick and choose what they want out of an article instead of reading it in its entirety. I think offering these stories online really takes away from the readership of the print publication because there is not much difference between the content on the website and the content in the print publication. In fact, people.com offers a large portion of the front-page article of the print publication every week. In that four to five paragraph “teaser” people.com offers, most people can understand the main points to the story and would have no reason to go out and buy the magazine. I think the fact that people.com offers so many of the stories found throughout its print publication as the stories happen and offer a “teaser” to their cover story hurts more than helps their print circulation.
Another thing that hurts People’s print circulation is the amount of photos offered on people.com in comparison to the print publication. Everyday people.com offers a photo gallery of celebrity sightings consisting on anywhere from 10 to 20 photos. In the weekly print publication only a handful of the photos that appear in all the galleries from the week are featured with the same explanation that is offered on the website. People.com also keeps an archive of all the daily photo galleries so that visitors can go back to look at any of the posted photos. I think the lack of variety and surprise in the photos offered in the print publication really takes away from the circulation of the print publication. If anyone can access people.com and see all the stories and photos than there is no reason to go out and buy the print publication because they have already read the stories and seen the pictures since they were on people.com earlier in the week.
One of the things that sets people.com apart from the print publication is that it is able to post videos. People.com now offers its own entertainment recap show every Monday and also offers the five funniest daytime television clips highlight video. This is more information that is found on the website than is offered in the magazine. I think that people are more likely to use a news outlet that offers more for their time than they are to use a news outlet that doesn’t offer as much. I think the ability to put more content on their website draws more people to read people.com than the print publication because people are getting more for their time and don’t have to pay anything to get it.
The one thing that really sticks out about people.com is that they are able to create a story centered around quotes used by celebrities in other print publications. Currently a feature story on people.com is an article on quotes supermodel Gisele Bundchen made in an upcoming issue of Vanity Fair magazine. Vanity Fair released several quotes Bundchen made in an upcoming article and people.com created a feature story centering around those quotes. While it seems like releasing the quotes is a strategy to get more readers for their print publication, I don’t see how that works. The people.com story framed Bundchen’s quotes very well, and while I’m sure she made more than the quotes used in the people.com story, there were enough quotes released to realize the direction of the story in the upcoming issue of Vanity Fair. While I think this method does get some people to buy a magazine, I also think it gives readers enough of the story that they feel they don’t have to read the actual article.
While I think people.com is a great thing because I get all the information I want as soon as it happens for free, I think it really takes away from the magazine circulation, although not to the point yet where the company has decided to go completely online. If the website keeps offering more, fresh information than the magazine we may one day see People Magazine as a completely web based publication.
As soon as you click on the homepage for people.com all of the major entertainment stories from the day pop up with little blurbs underneath telling what each story is about. These stories are constantly updated throughout the day and the blurb helps visitors choose which stories they want to read. I think the blurbs offered lead to more “info snaking” because people can pick and choose what they want out of an article instead of reading it in its entirety. I think offering these stories online really takes away from the readership of the print publication because there is not much difference between the content on the website and the content in the print publication. In fact, people.com offers a large portion of the front-page article of the print publication every week. In that four to five paragraph “teaser” people.com offers, most people can understand the main points to the story and would have no reason to go out and buy the magazine. I think the fact that people.com offers so many of the stories found throughout its print publication as the stories happen and offer a “teaser” to their cover story hurts more than helps their print circulation.
Another thing that hurts People’s print circulation is the amount of photos offered on people.com in comparison to the print publication. Everyday people.com offers a photo gallery of celebrity sightings consisting on anywhere from 10 to 20 photos. In the weekly print publication only a handful of the photos that appear in all the galleries from the week are featured with the same explanation that is offered on the website. People.com also keeps an archive of all the daily photo galleries so that visitors can go back to look at any of the posted photos. I think the lack of variety and surprise in the photos offered in the print publication really takes away from the circulation of the print publication. If anyone can access people.com and see all the stories and photos than there is no reason to go out and buy the print publication because they have already read the stories and seen the pictures since they were on people.com earlier in the week.
One of the things that sets people.com apart from the print publication is that it is able to post videos. People.com now offers its own entertainment recap show every Monday and also offers the five funniest daytime television clips highlight video. This is more information that is found on the website than is offered in the magazine. I think that people are more likely to use a news outlet that offers more for their time than they are to use a news outlet that doesn’t offer as much. I think the ability to put more content on their website draws more people to read people.com than the print publication because people are getting more for their time and don’t have to pay anything to get it.
The one thing that really sticks out about people.com is that they are able to create a story centered around quotes used by celebrities in other print publications. Currently a feature story on people.com is an article on quotes supermodel Gisele Bundchen made in an upcoming issue of Vanity Fair magazine. Vanity Fair released several quotes Bundchen made in an upcoming article and people.com created a feature story centering around those quotes. While it seems like releasing the quotes is a strategy to get more readers for their print publication, I don’t see how that works. The people.com story framed Bundchen’s quotes very well, and while I’m sure she made more than the quotes used in the people.com story, there were enough quotes released to realize the direction of the story in the upcoming issue of Vanity Fair. While I think this method does get some people to buy a magazine, I also think it gives readers enough of the story that they feel they don’t have to read the actual article.
While I think people.com is a great thing because I get all the information I want as soon as it happens for free, I think it really takes away from the magazine circulation, although not to the point yet where the company has decided to go completely online. If the website keeps offering more, fresh information than the magazine we may one day see People Magazine as a completely web based publication.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
USA Today Critique
USA Today is an online news source that comes to my mind that also is a major national print publication. USA Today is sent to many homes across the United States, and also with technology today can be read online too. To be completely honest, I believe that online reading is so much easier than print, but it also has negative aspects of it as well.
While looking through the homepage of USAToday.com they seem to categorize the news by most popular and the top news. A positive part of online reading compared to print news is that many online media reading sources use “info. Snacking.” They use the title that links you to the article, therefore the reader does not have to read everything, but pick and choose what interests them. USA Today also uses a variety of multimedia to help cover all of the interesting articles. They use videos and different links that will give more information to cover that article. When reading the USA Today print at home, this seems to be a problem. Print media can only be viewed from what the newspaper has chosen to be in the . Clicking to other links is obviously not going to be able to happen in a print media.
Personally, I believe that watching videos and being able to link to other material is very resourceful and helpful. Sometimes hearing something is easier to understand than reading something. For an example, the video showing the Fargo flood is more meaningful to watch because you actually can see what these people are going through. Sometimes writers can have a hard time describing something, such as a disaster in words; therefore by having online media, they can do both.
I also believe that online sourcing is easier and more convenient. USA Today uses RSS, which allows an email to be sent of the latest news updates. This is very beneficial because the reader does not have to visit the website every time and can get the news right to their own email. This can not happen whenever your reading the newspaper.
Don’t get me wrong I do believe sometimes online media can be overwhelming, sometimes a video will not work, or words will not display on the computer screen. Other times they have so much in archives and in their present news, that you can find yourself getting lost in the site. While reading a newspaper this would not happen and it’s pretty hard to get overwhelmed from an everyday newspaper. Overall, with technology today I believe the obvious statement is that it is easier and more efficient to read online media sources to get more information from more than one perspective. The different multimedia that is used on the USA Today site already makes it better than its newsprint.
While looking through the homepage of USAToday.com they seem to categorize the news by most popular and the top news. A positive part of online reading compared to print news is that many online media reading sources use “info. Snacking.” They use the title that links you to the article, therefore the reader does not have to read everything, but pick and choose what interests them. USA Today also uses a variety of multimedia to help cover all of the interesting articles. They use videos and different links that will give more information to cover that article. When reading the USA Today print at home, this seems to be a problem. Print media can only be viewed from what the newspaper has chosen to be in the . Clicking to other links is obviously not going to be able to happen in a print media.
Personally, I believe that watching videos and being able to link to other material is very resourceful and helpful. Sometimes hearing something is easier to understand than reading something. For an example, the video showing the Fargo flood is more meaningful to watch because you actually can see what these people are going through. Sometimes writers can have a hard time describing something, such as a disaster in words; therefore by having online media, they can do both.
I also believe that online sourcing is easier and more convenient. USA Today uses RSS, which allows an email to be sent of the latest news updates. This is very beneficial because the reader does not have to visit the website every time and can get the news right to their own email. This can not happen whenever your reading the newspaper.
Don’t get me wrong I do believe sometimes online media can be overwhelming, sometimes a video will not work, or words will not display on the computer screen. Other times they have so much in archives and in their present news, that you can find yourself getting lost in the site. While reading a newspaper this would not happen and it’s pretty hard to get overwhelmed from an everyday newspaper. Overall, with technology today I believe the obvious statement is that it is easier and more efficient to read online media sources to get more information from more than one perspective. The different multimedia that is used on the USA Today site already makes it better than its newsprint.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)