Digital media versus the broadsheet

The Age carries a very interesting article today by Brigid Delaney on the digital media and what we get.  Brigid is right: most of the web versions of the papers don’t tend to offer the same depth (unless you look for it) as the paper version.

More worrying, as the article points out, is the “snippet” approach to reading the news by those of the digital age.  For my age group, I am probably not the norm.  I too read the news on the web most of the time.  Every now and then I will actually go and buy the real thing.

I remember being at a workshop on some professional development topic or other with a variety of people.  One of the other attendees was in charge of web site content and gave a short presentation about her work.  The way of writing for grabbing attention on the web is quite interesting (I would fail miserably) for there is a need to grab the attention in that first headline or sentence.  Writers know they have a very limited attention span to work with, so must get the message across in a matter of seconds.

Are we becoming a world that knows very little about a lot?  Is what we know even remotely accurate?  Are we, as the article suggests, concentrating only on the banalities around us?  Paris Hilton gets more attention than asylum seekers for example.  How much do people REALLY know about the whole asylum seeker debate, which let’s be fair, is far more important than Paris or LiLo.  Look at how much screen space was devoted to the St Kilda nude photo issue lately (which yes, I agree, I commented on myself), or how Fevola only has to sneeze to capture the digital front page – of even the broadsheets!  Yet are either of those local stories really front page news when compared with much else that is happening in the world?  Are the floods in Queensland less important that Fev?  I think not.

I often click on a headline or “breaking news” only to find the article is in fact five lines that tell me nothing.  OK, so I now know some guy was arrested somewhere, but I don’t know the details and will probably never find out.

Are Twitter and Facebook becoming almost our defacto news feeds?  After all, what do you have on Facebook? A page titled “News Feed” – but it isn’t.  How many people say they learned of something on Twitter?  How much can you learn from 140 characters?  Twitter is a great way to spread misinformation, though.  Retweet something often enough and it almost becomes accepted fact.  Look at the celebrities using Twitter to deny transgressions!

There is nothing truer than we get what we ask for.  As a population, it seems, we are asking for banality.  That is what we will keep getting, unless we ask for something else. 

Advertisement

Clearly I’m not rich!

Working from home today and waiting on a supplier phone call, so flipped over to The Age to see what the latest headlines bring us.  Something other than St Kilda and the “young girl”, was my hope.

While the “young girl” did still grab the picture spotlight (how many days is it now?), one of the headings took my eye.  A shonky health aid.  Oh, good – something different, I thought to myself.  Well, only partly, for Nick Riewoldt was mentioned as wearing one so it seems we can’t escape his name. 

The bands, worn by footballers Nick Riewoldt and Brendan Fevola as well as jockey Damien Oliver, were said to improve sports performance, but were found to be a scam.

The report quotes the ACCC chairman:

ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel said it was ”fairly obvious” there was no credible evidence to support claims being made by companies selling similar products.

”I’d be very interested to see other people demonstrate how the insertion of a hologram into a bracelet can have the sort of effects that they claim,” he said, adding that some of the things being said by companies ”beggared belief”.

”Distributors of other like products be warned: we’re on to this issue,” Mr Samuel said.

Now, what REALLY got me was – THE PRICE!  Hence my headline!  I’ve not heard of these wonderful Power Bands  and pendants and given they are selling for “up to $1,568”, I’m not surprised I haven’t.  My money is going in more constructive directions.  $1,568?  For a hologram?  The clasp better be diamond studded 18 carat gold for that price.

Source: The Age

Call me skeptical, but it looks like cheap plastic with a McDonald’s logo if you ask me.

Improve performance?  Eat better food, train harder and keep cameras out of your lives might be better advice!  Interesting that Brendan Fevola wears one.  When we consider his well-publicised challenges of late, I’m not sure such a band is the solution.  Good old-fashioned will-power is likely to be more effective.

I can’t help but ponder the never ending stream of things people will try to use to “save” themselves or make themselves “better”, from religion (mainstream or otherwise) to crystals to Power Bands.  Most of us would be better simply looking in the mirror and asking ourselves what do we need to change to achieve our goals.  We, us, inside ourselves and out.  Why do we prefer to look for miracles and magic?  Simply because those are……………. EASIER!  Maybe I’m just getting old and grumpy! 😛