Please choose and then read one of the following sets of event coverage:
- A) A capella competition: tweets & blog
- B) Beanpot final: tweets & blog
- C) Magners Comedy Fest: tweets & blog
Then, respond to this post by answering these questions about the event coverage you chose:
- What were some of the differences in FORM and CONTENT between the tweets and the blog?
- Which platform, Twitter or CoveritLive, was utilized more effectively; which was better suited to the event covered; and why?
Please be sure to use specific examples from the Twitter and CoveritLive sessions, and make an effort to read and comment on your colleagues' responses. Remember, there are no wrong answers to these questions; we're looking for insights into the attributes of these platforms and how to use them most effectively.
I have decided to take a second look at Brad and Tristan's coverage of the Beanpot Championships.
ReplyDeleteThe first, and probably most obvious difference between the blog entries and tweet is that the blog entries are written with complete sentences and more details. The guys introduced themselves on the blog and explained what they were doing, while the tweets just kind of showed up. For example: Brad tweeted "BU vs. BC for the title at 8:08pm" but blogged "Welcome to our coverage of the 2010 Beanpot Championship. Boston College and Boston University are set to drop the puck at 8 p.m. Check back for more coverage throughout the evening." "Both teams have taken the ice for warmups as the TD Garden begins to fill with fans. Puck drop is slated for 8:08 p.m."
The tweets gives you the straight hit of facts, but the blog puts a little more color and background with it.
The majority of the tweets were also play-by-play like. For example "BC GOAL - Eagles take the 2-1 lead on a snipe by Carl Sneep. 7:27 to go in the second." The blog gives you more of a sense of being involved at the actual arena. For example "As the camera shows fans around the arena, we hear another Beanpot tradition for the first time. Whenever a BC fan is shown, the BC fans cheer, the BU fans boo and vice versa. It will continue all night." Both platforms were able to show pictures, which is a nice addition, but the only photos the guys uploaded were right at the beginning of the night of fans.
Overall I think the guys' blog was more effective than their tweeting for this event. The tweets were good if you just wanted the straight fact - such as the score of the game - but the blog went more in depth as to what happened to get to that score or that penalty. For example: (from blog) "BU GOAL - The Dog Pound goes nuts as BU junior captain Kevin Shattenkirk fires home the first goal of this championship game." "The goal comes 13:36 into the opening frame and is announced as an unassisted tally. It's the fourth goal of the season for Shattenkirk and his first Beanpot goal in his sixth career game in the tournament." While the tweet just said "BU GOAL - 1-0 BU as Kevin Shattenkirk puts the Terriers on the board with an unassisted tally". The blogging just got readers more into the atmosphere and the spirit of the game. They were able to reference interviews in the blog, and give statistics about the game and the players, and it was just much more informative. I'm wondering if the guys felt this same way because they seemed to put more effort into updating their blog than tweeting.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA capella
ReplyDelete1. Some the difference were the length of the posts obviously. The live blog allowed them to give those following a better idea of what was going on in detail. The twitter posts were more of a bigger picture outlook. They make constant reference of what the group on stage is doing (dance moves are grabbing the judges attention) in the live blog but are constrained to updating which group is performing which song on twitter.
2. I think coveritlive was better suited for this event. Their twitter posts did not change much from the beginning to end. All there was to say in 140 characters was who is performing and what they were performing. Coveritlive gave them space to elaborate and also make comments such as how one of the posters was an RA and one of residents was in the competition. It also gave them space to describe what the event was all about. They did a good job of this in the opening posts. Who is there, whats at stake and whats next. Adding the two videos was also great. It allowed people to watch and get an understanding of what these groups are all about.
A capella competition: The form of the Twitter and Live Blog differ in that the Live Blog begins at the first post, which is easier to follow than Twitter which begins at the last. Also, there is obviously more space in the Live Blog and although Twitter can link to pictures, having the picture and video right with the text was really nice. As for content, Twitter only covered song choices, results and some crowd reaction whereas the blog was able to tell a little more background.
ReplyDeletecberk posted: "Now it's BU's oldest A Capella group Terpischore. Their first song is "Dream On" by Aerosmith." Little details like BU's oldest a capella group really add depth to the coverage. I also really liked the "Fun fact: Terpsichore is the Muse of dancing and singing in Greek mythology." Again, a detail not necessary for the story but it adds another level.
I think CoveritLive was utilized better. Not only were there text based observations but also pictures from the event and videos of past events or original versions of the song performed. I loved that they posted the original version of "Chicago" by Sufjan Stevens. I had never heard that song before so it was really nice to be able to listen to it and have an idea of what it sounded like when it was sung at the event.
Since I wasn't there, I wouldn't have followed the Twitter because I wouldn't have cared about what songs were playing. But with CoveritLive, even though I wasn't there I could still interact with the music through the videos. I also really liked the use of the graph. That was a great idea because, again, it allowed me to interact more with the event.
The Beanpot tweets are in reverse chronological order, which is inconvenient because, if you use the #bubeanpot tag, they aren’t necessarily separated from other tweets on the subject, and it can be difficult to tell when their coverage begins. Using the #jo540 tag eliminates most of the interrupting content, but one of Twitter’s strengths is its ability to give a reader many impressions at once of one event, and narrowing the field cripples that strength. I agree with Jillian that the Twitter coverage was only good for finding the hard facts, but the reporters could have done better there: “What a move by Kreider!! Dangles and scores!” doesn’t tell me who scored unless I know Kreider plays for BC, and it doesn’t tell me what the score is now. Given that Twitter plays toward the ADD crowd, it’s important to include that kind of information rather than force readers to hunt for it. “BC GOAL - Steven Whitney scores on the power play to even the score at 1-1,” on the other hand, tells me everything important.
ReplyDeleteThe writers were clearly more comfortable without the 140-character limit. Tristan’s color-commentary style has more room to stretch on the CoverItLive blog, though some of his entries (“This is an unbelievable game” comes to mind) probably should have been expanded, made into tweets, or else not broadcast. Moreover, the blog has a sense of conversation, which the tweets lack, between the writers and their audience. The blog is in chronological order, which makes it easier to read than the tweets. The blog also has more pictures (two of them, admittedly, from Twitter).
With fuller coverage than the tweets, the liveblog is easily the better-used platform. It’s possible that commentary on a game would be better on Twitter, but it would require complete concentration on the Twitter account and sparing use of words, which, as the blog shows, isn’t always possible. A liveblog is better suited to this kind of event.
Taking a look at the coverage of the Beanpot by Brad and Tristan you can really see the contrast between the two platforms. Their twitter feed focused solely on short play-by and short declarative statements. For instance Tristan tweets "Insane at the Garden" after BU makes it a 4-3 game. In the same span of time Brad and Tristan on coveritlive, describe the excitement, the signficance (Colby Cohen etched into Beanpot history) and then gives an interesting face about twitter and the beanpot. It seems obvious that they used twitters as headlines with coveritlive being their main substance for their coverage.
ReplyDeleteI think Coveritlive was better suited for the event because they were able to provide play-by-play and insight for people that weren't attending. The twitter feed merely gave pieces to the puzzle while coveritlive provided the same pieces and glue to bring it all together. I felt coveritlive provided much more comprehensive coverage of the event and allowed them to better interact with their viewers. The ability to constantly update the score and time remaining also makes it more useful for a sporting event, on twitter they only posted score updates and the viewer had no idea how much time was left.
Beanpot Final:
ReplyDeleteI thought the CoveritLive blogging was more informational and free-flowing than Twitter. It allowed for more detailed reporting. I like how Brad and Tristan uploaded pictures of each school’s respective cheering section and as oppose to Twitter, no additional link was needed. You can tell from the comments on their CoveritLive blog that other people thought their blogging was very resourceful. Also there was lively banter back and forth between the bloggers and readers. Readers could post questions and Tristan and Brad did a good job of answering to the best of their ability (fluke goal and hockey recruiting). The blog also provides the freedom for long quotes (In Brad and Tristan’s case this was the quote from a BU fan talking about the magnitude of the Beanpot). The blog also allowed for correction of any mistakes and a flushed out explanation that followed (correction about referee Tim Benedetto).
Twitter, on the other hand, was too brief. You could argue the information was more concise and to the point but it lacked detail. Analysis was sacrificed for pure news bites. The tweets focused mostly on game score, which player scored, and remaining time.
I think the blogging was clearly more effective for the event. They did a great job of flushing out detail and keeping the audience interested with additional commentary outside of the realms of what was happening on the ice. I enjoyed the interviews they added.
I read the coveritlive and twitter updates for the a capella competition.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Leah, that the blog was much easier to follow, due to the order of the posts. The tweets and blog posts do differ somewhat in length, as they should given the twitter's word maximum, but I would have liked to see some longer, more descriptive posts on the blog. Perhaps further describing the performers, the crowd's reactions, or criticism and opinion by the authors. The videos and pictures were helpful in getting an idea of the atmosphere of the show, as well as hearing the performers. I liked that the blog provided history and "fun facts" about the groups, this helped distinguish the groups in my head while reading.
I actually think the twitter was a better platform for this event. The authors chose to update with shorter, more frequent posts, which is more suitable for twitter. The extra details that differentiate the blog from the twitter (Pitch Slapped is the favorite, Terpsichore's choice of outfit) could be just as well integrated into twitter updates.
I definitely think the blogs were easier to follow for the A Capella and the Beanpot coverage. They were extremely organized and gave the readers good background info on the events and created a sense of atmosphere. I think they both used good incorporation of pictures and quotes. I liked that in the A Capella piece they polled the audience members as to what their favorite song out of the concert was. The blog on the Comedy Fest seemed really short and I think there could have been more content.
ReplyDeleteThe tweets seemed kind of random and almost out of order. It was more difficult to follow as to what exactly was going on. I agree with Jackson when he says that the tweets were too brief and lacked detail. Although,I think it also portrayed different opinions.
Overall, I think the blog on Coveritlive was used more effectively. I feel a live blog would be more appropriate for this type of event because the authors created an atmosphere so that the reader could picture what was actually happening.
A Cappella Group
ReplyDeleteThe tweets were great for quick updates, like which group was up next and what songs they were singing, the tweets provided an up to the minute track list of the night. It was also good for basic information, just the facts as they come in. The tweets were shorter of course, but had good concise information. The live blog was great for reactions of the crowd and more explanation of the contest itself, like when cberk posted how the contest is structured and pictures of the auditorium were posted to show the audience. The live blog allowed the reporters to tell readers what’s coming up, like when jenbrownnn posted about the upcoming songs, videos, pictures and interviews to keep the readers hooked. Both Twitter and CoverItLive allows for quotes, but CoverItLive leaves more room for lengthier quotes and attribution.
It helped that both Twitter and CoverItLive allowed photos posted, but I think CoverItLive was better in that the photos were right there in the blog, not in another page like twitpics. This allowed for people to check out the multimedia components, but stay in the same place and keep following the blog as it unfolds.
I think CoverItLive was used to its full potential due to its nature. Twitter will only let you do so much and jenbrownnn utilized Twitter well, but the blog posts, Youtube videos, photos and the poll really showed how much you can do with CoverItLive. I was really impressed that a poll can be added to the live blog – I think that adds such a great real time reflection of the audience and it really gets the people involved.
CoverItLive was the best avenue for this event because there is so much to talk about and CoverItLive gives reporters the space. The videos, pictures, descriptions and quotes all painted a real picture of the event for those who weren’t there.
Beanpot Final:
ReplyDeleteI thought it was an excellent coverage. Obviously, the tweets are shorter and because they are so short, they usually focus on the most important element of the games: scores, who's leading, timing, name of the players that scored, etc. The blog has more space to talk about the environment, what the fans are chanting (which were great to go with pictures), background on the players and the teams, their training before the game, and of course lots of quotes. These elements can really give you a lot of perspectives of the game.
I think the blog was better utilized for the beanpot coverage. I'm not too familiar with hockey players, so I loved when they posted things like "BU junior defenseman Colby Cohen is playing tonight. Cohen, who scored a goal in the semifinals, missed Saturday's win at UMass Lowell due to an injury and was considered doubtful for tonight's game" or "Kevin Shattenkirk is the first junior to captain the Terriers since Jack O'Callahan (of Miracle on Ice fame) the 1977-78 season. A New Rochelle, N.Y., native, he was drafted by the Colorado Avalanche." I also really like the description of the crowds, such as "As the camera shows fans around the arena, we hear another Beanpot tradition for the first time. Whenever a BC fan is shown, the BC fans cheer, the BU fans boo and vice versa. It will continue all night." The photos were great too, but I wish there were more.
Overall, very nicely done and I enjoyed it a lot even though I don't usually follow sports.
Looked at the Beanpot Final -
ReplyDelete1. The differences in form obviously include the lack of detail in the twitter updates. The blog was able to incorporate many different aspects of what was fully going on at the arena outside of the play-by-play of the twitter updates.
2. Comparing the two, the blog was by far not only easier to follow, but more clear and descriptive. This, of course, is a product of Twitter's limitations, but for something large and grandiose like the Beanpot, where legions of people are in the crowd and the whole city stops to watch, I feel like the more descriptive the coverage is, the better. If someone does not have access to the television feed but has access to the Internet and has the choice between the blog or twitter updates, the blog is the clear winner. Even the comments on CoverItLive back up this, with one reader, Mike from Seattle, explaining that the blog is the only coverage he can get. In order to experience the event as fully as possible, the descriptions of the style and tempo of the play, the crowd and the atmosphere that won't fit into 140 characters are necessary.
A Cappella:
ReplyDeleteI agree with previous posts in that I believe the CoveritLive platform was better suited for this type of event. While the tweets were helpful in presenting facts like who was on, what song they were singing, and who ended up winning, CoveritLive added color to the event, which was colorful to begin with.
I liked the extra background info that was presented in the CoveritLive such as the meaning of one group's name, Terpsichore: "Fun fact: Terpsichore is the Muse of dancing and singing in Greek mythology."
CoveritLive allowed readers to feel as if they were there because of its incorporation of photos, videos, and the poll. I enjoyed that they not only included videos from the actual event, but also the original music videos of the artists themselves from YouTube: a nice contrast to fully grasp what a cappella is all about. CoveritLive really enticed its readers.
CoveritLive was concise and had all the information (blogs, photos, and videos) all on one page--I think twitter can appear to be more cluttered.
And while twitter was more of a real-time, minute-by-minute update, CoveritLive was the best platform for this event because it allowed the bloggers more creative space to allow readers to get a full grasp of the a cappella show.
Looking at the coverage of the a capella competition, in this case the Twitter and CoverItLive feeds were actually pretty similar giving frequent, brief updates of the proceedings. The blog was of course more descriptive, though, which gave a better and fuller picture of the whole event.
ReplyDeleteA blog and Twitter feed are almost the same thing, the difference being the character limit on Twitter. From looking at this event and from our own experience covering the Beanpot, I think the blog is a better platform because it can provide more detail, yet does not necessarily require it. I do think a concert is uniquely well-suited for Twitter, though, because it makes it very easy to provide a simple real-time setlist, which is really the only news happening at most concerts. The competition aspect at this event provided some more action, though, and the blog did a good job of capturing that. The blog also did a good job of bringing in other multimedia aspects such as links to YouTube videos of the groups performing and their songs. I thought that added a great level of depth to the coverage.
In general, though, I think a blog is better suited for any type of set event in one place with a beginning and an end. Twitter would be better for more of an ongoing story, such as developments leading up to the NBA trade deadline or campaign updates leading up to an election, the type of story where you don't know when something newsworthy is going to happen and there are a lot of small developments that may not warrant a full story in and of themselves.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI looked at the Beanpot Final a second time:
ReplyDeleteWhile the blog included information about what was happening outside the game, I felt that the way Twitter was used was limiting its effectiveness. It seemed as if just Twitter was only being used to include the basic play by play of the game, which was also happening on the liveblog, so the use of Twitter in that sense was almost not needed. Even as a system of play by play, the Tweets really did not even describe what was happening in much detail. When Tristan tweets that BU is "making this a game" the reader has no idea what that means. Have they scored? Are they building momentum? Are BC falling back or making mistakes? That BU's comeback is only mentioned after the game is ended was a mistake.
Twitter's character limit does make it hard to include any real details, so I'm not sure what I would have done differently though. However, if I were following this event, I would have just stuck with the liveblog and not even bothered with the Twitter, as most things discussed on the tweets were being explained in more detail on the liveblog.
That said, I thought the liveblog was effective. As someone who attended the game, I liked that the liveblog included some details about the chants and also had pictures of the crowd, which I thought was the most important part of the game. While the hockey game itself was interesting, as someone who attended the event, the interplay between the BU and BC fans was far more fun and exciting. While the liveblog didn't explore it exactly as well as I would have hoped, it did at least address the issue.
Also, even though the liveblog had no limits, some of the information posted there was woefully short. The post at 10:14, which said "OH MY GOD! Kieran Millan!!!" was particularly emblematic of this problem. This is a tweet, not a blog post. Someone might tweet this as a general reaction and then tweet directly afterwards with what happened. But on both the Twitter and the liveblog, the reader was left not knowing what just happened. We inferred it was a big save, but there was no way of knowing.
It seemed as if throughout the event, the line between what should have been blogged and what should have been tweeted was never clearly established, and so each platform traded responsibilities throughout the night, which made it a little difficult to follow.