Monday, March 31, 2008
Reaching Audiences at in Interactive Age
This article describes new obstacles faced by writers today- especially those in Hollywood. It discusses the need to incorporate new technology in modern stories in order to reach out to three different audiences; content consumers, sharers, and remixers. It talks about how the writers are going to have to adapt in order to thrive in new media environments. I think this is an interesting article, because it really demonstrates how new forms of technology are affecting a wide range of people.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
While it makes sense that obstacles exist for publishers, writers, and film producers to conform to technology's increasingly interactive nature--overcoming these challenges could have positive implications for science in the media. Becoming more interactive obviously involves greater psychological and intellectual involvement. If the trend with all major forms of media demands a more active audience, then problems associated with passively accepting scientific facts within science journalism and other mediums could potentially be reduced if this too becomes more interactive. In class we have talked about the low understanding of science garnered from science media targeting the general population. However, if new findings are put into context through means of interactive media, then a deeper understanding of the issues presented is almost guaranteed on some level. Right?
The article mentioned, however, that audiences/readers/viewers don't just want the option of personally interacting with the story-- they want the story itself to contain aspects of social interaction or the potential to be a social experience. As the article says, "Audiences don’t want a “choose your own adventure” experience from films and novels. What they want is the shared experience of sitting down and being led through a narrative that they can later discuss with friends."
I think that, rather than helping science journalism, this aspect of changing audiences could actually hurt scientific journalism-- if our audience effectively has a shorter attention span for stories that aren't potentially sociable in some way, is this a setback for the cut-and-dry distribution of knowledge? In what ways can science journalism and science news stories adapt to this changing audience?
I think one way that they've done so is by having websites as a corrolary to the original article, which give "supplemental online material." In incorporating the Web, a highly social environment, science journalists are adapting to this new audience.
I completely agree with the second comment. As I read this article and audience responses to interactive television shows and “choose your own adventure” scenarios I had to wonder whether this would decrease audience numbers, not improve them. It’s true that new media are quickly overpowering the old; however the merger of new and old media should be limited. Audiences want a shared experience through television. Although it’s great to have individualization and choices through various digital and cable channels and now the combination of TV and the internet, this may also lead to a sense of isolation among audiences. With everyone watching different programs at different times all across the internet, that promise of “water-cooler” socializing the next day is lost. While there are definitely benefits to converting more shows and news stories to online formats, they are mostly used out of convenience not necessity and media leaders should consider the possible loss of community before making drastic changes in how they distribute knowledge as well as entertainment. It would be beneficial to have a more active audience, but not necessarily practical to force interactivity upon audiences just looking for a passive, background experience.
Post a Comment