why shorter web-articles?

There are three main reasons for most news websites to provide short intros to their written pieces (and to keep news short for that matter):

1) Web users are impatient.
2) For a news site to maintain its interest among the users it needs to be constantly updated.
3) Short pieces allow a greater variety of topics on show each time you access the site.

In order to manage this most websites only publish the first paragraph or even just the first sentence of a news piece. The BBC’s website, one of my favourites, is an excellent example of this. How often you access a new site for information and up-dates is either determined by the way it is managed (laid out) or if a website’s material is of specific interest to yourself.

However, the three reasons for presentation of material in brief that I mentioned at the beginning are not the only driving forces. Incidentally, research shows that people read considerably slower from a screen than from a printed source.

On top of that studies have shown that you can expect a new reader/visitor to spend less than 10 seconds making something out of your message or he’s gone. Consequently, one of the key rules to adhere to is to realize for whom you are writing. Have I? Have you?

of rss and "system overload"

How many of you have noticed the symbol/logo (on the left) on your browser without even making the slightest attempt to check it out? I am one, for sure. A bit amazing really, as through my work RSS would have/will be of great advantage.

Basically RSS (short for Really Simple Syndication) is a group of Web feed formats used to publish web-content that is frequently updated, e.g. news sites. You can subscribe to as many feeds as you like to enable you to have an overview of proceedings.

Most browsers already include a RSS reader, making it very easy to establish your own family of feeds. Once gathered, they can easily be managed. You can delete the ones you don‘t want any more and add new as you feel necessary. Really, really simple!

I guess most of us only use the technology we feel we needed at any given moment, be it the use of software like Word, Excel or Photoshop. That probably also applies to Web-browsing. But is it just because we‘re lazy or is it perhaps a sign of “System Overload” in an age where technological breakthroughs seem to be the order of the day?

journalists can be lazy and selective

At the end of her presentation in class today Sherry Wang, my classmate, wondered whether the so called "online newsroom" posed a threat to the public relations practitioner. I tend to think not.

Although technology allows today's [lazy] journalists to access information in an easier manner than before there is nothing that indicates their behaviour has suddenly changed - or will, for that matter. Believe me, I know. I have worked as a journalist for almost 15 years.

Journalists are a bit like the resting salmon once having swum upstream during the spring for spawning. There's lot of food around but the fish is overworked, tired and picky. When the right meal comes along (sometimes a man-made fake bait) the the tail muscles work overtime to ensure a "scoop."

To hook a journalist's attention you have to use the right type of bait. When it comes to such specified methods, a simple web-link simply isn't enough unless the story is of such importance or magnitude that every media feels obliged to publish it.

However, most of the time journalist's attention needs to be aroused and their appetite whetted. And when it comes to that, skillful specialized PR practitioners do the job better than anyone else. When it comes to the art of communication an internet site or a news-release - no matter how good they might be - simply can't compete. Not yet.