According to Statista, Social media is now a major influence in the production of journalism. This year, more than 80 percent of journalists have used social media sites such as Facebook to help with the promotion and publication of their content. Two examples of this statistic are Vice and the Washington Post. In this article, I will be choosing a topic and comparing the content of the Washington Post, a more traditional journalistic source, to the content of Vice, a more cutting edge journalistic source. The topic that I will use for this comparison is firearms in America.
In terms of presentation, the two sources are exceedingly different. The Washington post uses a more traditional style of journalism by providing an article written by a reporter and different graphs that aid in explanation. Vice, on the other hand, provides a documentary-styled video that takes the viewer into the heart of the topic. Throughout the video, viewers will witness raw-footage that depicts the entirety of the subject.
Not only are the two sources different in the way they present the information, they are also different in the style that they present it. The Washington Post has a more professional and scientific approach by citing statistics and information from scholarly and credible sources. Even though Vice may cite information within their documentary that has been extracted from a credible source, most of its content is gritty, raw-footage that has been captured by first-hand accounts.
Out of the two sources, I think that Vice covers the issue more effectively. Vice appeals to me more because it relies solely on visual interpretation. I am more of a visual learner, so I appreciate the style and presentation of Vice over reading a journalistic article, such as one from the Washington Post. Because of the use of raw-footage, I think that Vice captures and maintains the attention of the viewer more effectively. The reporter that presents the material also does it in an informal way, which I believe is something that most audiences can appreciate. Rather than reading boring articles or charts, you can view videos that take you directly to the scene of the topic.
Another aspect in which Vice is more effective is that it not only has good quality, it also contains a greater quantity of content and information. The amount of information within a Vice video greatly surpasses the amount of information covered in the article. The Washington Post article is roughly a page long, while the Vice video 26 minutes. Vice videos also tend to be under 30 minutes, which I feel is a good length because it is long enough to effectively convey a topic, yet short enough to keep the viewer’s attention throughout most of its duration.
Overall, journalism in video format is a better alternative to journalistic articles, which I feel is very ironic to say in a journalistic blog post. According to an article written by Farhad Manjoo on Slate, about 38 percent of visitors leave before even finishing the first paragraph of an article. Because viewers already have a short attention span, it can be challenging to maintain their attention for entirety of the article. This is why Vice and other cutting edge formats of journalism are better at maintaining attention. It is much easier to maintain a viewers attention through video and audio than through writing. In conclusion, I feel that an audience is more likely to maintain an interest to information presented in an informal, yet informational video than a professional written article.
Manjoo, Farhad. “How People Read Online: You Won’t Finish this Article.” Slate. Web. Published 6th June, 2013. Accessed 2nd December, 2016.
Ingraham, Christopher. “There Are Now More Guns than People in the USA.” Washington Post. Web. Published 5th October, 2015. Accessed 2nd December, 2016.