Editing 1804: Video Content
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
In 2015, news media began an industry-wide transition away from text and towards video content, in what became known as the "pivot to video." News media has evolved dramatically as the world entered the {{w|information era}}. {{w|Newspapers}}, which were at one point the most widely distributed and consumed form of media, had rapidly been eclipsed by new technologies such as {{w|television}}, {{w|Internet}}, and {{w|streaming video}}, and subscriptions to paper-based media were drastically declining to the point where many {{w|publishers}} were on the verge of shutting down. Thus, many media sites started moving their content to video, as based on statistics that it was more popular, especially among younger consumers. However, the logic behind it was specious, as this comic shows. In 2016, it was revealed that the "pivot to video" was largely driven by inaccurate numbers touted by Facebook; while many sites continued trying to attract younger viewers with video content, the "pivot to video" became largely seen as a failed strategy. | In 2015, news media began an industry-wide transition away from text and towards video content, in what became known as the "pivot to video." News media has evolved dramatically as the world entered the {{w|information era}}. {{w|Newspapers}}, which were at one point the most widely distributed and consumed form of media, had rapidly been eclipsed by new technologies such as {{w|television}}, {{w|Internet}}, and {{w|streaming video}}, and subscriptions to paper-based media were drastically declining to the point where many {{w|publishers}} were on the verge of shutting down. Thus, many media sites started moving their content to video, as based on statistics that it was more popular, especially among younger consumers. However, the logic behind it was specious, as this comic shows. In 2016, it was revealed that the "pivot to video" was largely driven by inaccurate numbers touted by Facebook; while many sites continued trying to attract younger viewers with video content, the "pivot to video" became largely seen as a failed strategy. | ||
| β | The comic illustrates one such example with [[Cueball]] suggesting presenting news stories as videos rather than text. This is presented and received by [[Megan]], [[Hairbun]] and [[Hairy]] as a clever new idea that would appeal to young people based on the fact that they like watching {{w|YouTube}} videos. However, apparently no one in the comic has realized that television news programs have been filling such a niche for decades and that young people are just as | + | The comic illustrates one such example with [[Cueball]] suggesting presenting news stories as videos rather than text. This is presented and received by [[Megan]], [[Hairbun]] and [[Hairy]] as a clever new idea that would appeal to young people based on the fact that they like watching {{w|YouTube}} videos. However, apparently no one in the comic has realized that television news programs have been filling such a niche for decades and that young people are just as disinterested. In fact, online video based news is often considered annoying, especially if autoplaying or if there is no text based alternative. In reality, this idea is not at all original and likely to be doomed to fail from the start. As with many similar attempts, the new "ideas" that publishers are trying to adopt are merely cramming news content into things young people like, without really understanding why they like it and without considering whether news would be a good fit. |
In the caption, [[Randall]] suggests it would be pointless to argue with newspaper publishers about their ideas. Presumably Randall believes publishers who fall for those ideas are already out of touch with the new generation, and would not be able to understand why those ideas lack merit. Instead, he suggests taking the trend to a ridiculous extreme, by telling publishers that young people like {{w|making out}}. Suppose publishers follow the same pattern and try to cram news into this as well, they would end up creating some form of news program centered around making out. The results may turn out completely laughable or highly entertaining. If the former, it could serve as a wake-up call to publishers that they need to reconsider their approach. If the latter, then it could actually become a trend and unexpectedly reinvigorate the industry. | In the caption, [[Randall]] suggests it would be pointless to argue with newspaper publishers about their ideas. Presumably Randall believes publishers who fall for those ideas are already out of touch with the new generation, and would not be able to understand why those ideas lack merit. Instead, he suggests taking the trend to a ridiculous extreme, by telling publishers that young people like {{w|making out}}. Suppose publishers follow the same pattern and try to cram news into this as well, they would end up creating some form of news program centered around making out. The results may turn out completely laughable or highly entertaining. If the former, it could serve as a wake-up call to publishers that they need to reconsider their approach. If the latter, then it could actually become a trend and unexpectedly reinvigorate the industry. | ||
