Reading “From Tom Paine to Blogs,” (another one of our history readings for the week:) ) I connected this to a lot of the similar information I learned in my public relations and media class last year. We learned a lot about newspapers being gold back in the early American days, because that is the only media information that people received, and with that, people took everything that was written at face value. That’s a lot of power in just a few hands (owners, gatekeepers etc…). What a contrast to how things are today. Everyone’s opinion is out there. For example, Yellow Journalism was practiced by the brave and the few who could handle the controversy’s criticism and could get their books and articles out there. Now, all you need is WI FI and a controversial opinion about someone or something and you could be practicing Yellow Journalism.
A particular section of the article that stood out to me was the “ransom note media.” I never knew about the fact that desktop publishing was the start of “new voices.” I sort of assumed that new voices only “happened” when the internet opened its doors. I love how the author wrote that “the typographical mishmash was a small price to pay for all those new voices.” That just told me that it doesn’t matter the presentation or professionalism per say, as long as a voice has a strong opinion, people want to hear it.
In regards to “Ours, Theirs, and the Blogger’s Zone,” I enjoyed reading about how they tweaked their site to work for their audience. I mostly saw it through marketing eyes though. So although they kept mentioning how they wanted to make everything work to the reader’s needs and to hear the reader, I looked at their moves in changing up the site and adding a blog, and “hearing the reader,” as a means to an end, and not the end itself. So the journalists getting Facebook and the site reflecting the reader’s wants is just a way to get the reader to drive more traffic to their site as well as devotion (which translates into traffic as the devoted becomes a referral system for the Telegraph). All in all, I think they did a great job in seeking out the reader’s opinion to use it to their (financial) benefit.
“From Blog to Narrative” didn’t make much sense to me. I could understand the value of eye witnessing blogs and how that was higher on the scale than conventional journalists (with their processed food compared to the organic blog), but I don’t understand the “Narrative” on the other high end of the curve. Of course the blog aspect was the main point of the article, but I wish the author expanded a little more about the Narrative journalism being equally high with the blog on the curve, because at the end of the article, I didn’t have a solid idea of Benton’s Curve.
1. Since I’m still a bit confused with the narrative aspect of the article, a big question for me is, what did Benton mean by “Narrative” and what does that entail?
2. A big aspect of marketing is to find out what your target wants and then provide that for them. Did you feel that The Telegraph was practicing a clear marketing scheme or that it was genuinely trying to make the reader’s experience on the site more beneficial? And if so (or not) how were you able to see that displayed?