I read a blog entry by Mindy McAdams about multimedia journalism. At first, McAdams says that an image in and of itself is not capable of telling a story without movement or words. What do you think of that?
Toward the end, seemingly a complete opposite idea, McAdams argues that as many words as possible should be cut because things tend to be too wordy.
Or is this to say that we should always pair words or audio with images, but that the words should be simple and important, only?
Also, just a little random piece of fun:
View the most EMAILED links for today from CNN.com:
1.
Surfing cat
2.
Defendant slugs lawyer
3.
Friendly moose raises eyebrows
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think she's more pointing toward the Bard's mentality -- that is, "brevity is the soul of wit." I think she's right, too. It seems like a serious danger in producing multimedia pieces is judging how much of each kind of media you really need. Do you go with more striking single images and less text (in order to avoid splitting the audience's attention), or do you go with simpler images and more text (letting one fill in the others cracks)? I really get a lot out of her blog, and would love to take some of her classes.
All those in favor of bringing her up here for a day or two? Anybody ...?
I think that, yes, you should not be excessive with your words; however, I don't think words are vital all the time - though they are needed at times to provide context and other related facets of a story.
We've had Mindy on campus (Fall of 2006, I think). Talk with Dr. Middleton, he'd love to hear your opinion on having her back.
Note that as the premier multimedia educator, the Flash Goddess (as she likes to be called) is pretty busy.
Post a Comment