Did an online news "aggregator" find success mostly by gaming the search engines and using linking strategies? Are content farms flooding the Web with low quality content? Are summaries and photos more appealing to many people than longer articles or commentary?
Here's an interesting article from Slate on AOL buying The Huffington Post.
This commentary on HuffPo's road to success (and AOL purchase) has an interesting subtext: the nature and packaging of content, the mechanisms for delivery, and the evolution of news dissemination.
It's something for PR professionals and journalists to ponder.
How can we get the public to pay attention (and actually absorb and process) the news we're communicating? Do people today care about the quality of the writing or is the packaging more important to them? Do people prefer entertaining summaries and videos or do they want news articles they can sink their teeth into? Will there continue to be room for both or will snippets and visuals be preferred by all but the most curious among us?
What is "good enough" reporting to engage your audiences? Maybe "good enough" is not your style, but will you be forced to adjust your standards to continue to be effective?
Overloaded with information that comes at them from every direction (and multiple channels), do today's audiences absorb content or just breeze on through it?
It's a brave new world of information dissemination. And we have a lot to think about.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment