- Here is the Globe's blog, written by four reporters; and
- Here are the tweets written by a group of your colleagues (and Prof. Johnson's students).
Try reading each other's posts before responding.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Tweets & blogs, for §A1
As discussed in class, please have a look at these two coverages of election night at the Brown and Coakley HQ's:
Try reading each other's posts before responding.
Try reading each other's posts before responding.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Differences: 1. The tweets have pictures and the Globe's blog doesn't. It's a little more visually stimulating than just black text on a white page. 2. The Globe's blog has entries that are almost a paragraph long where the tweets are a sentence or less. 3. The tweets have some trivial entries about the food being served and things like that, and the Globe doesn't.
ReplyDeleteSimilarities: 1. Both formats gave regular poll updates. 2. They both published quotes from the parties. 3. They both started and ended their coverage at around the same time.
Differences:
ReplyDelete1. The Tweets have some photos uploaded, which I think is a great feature. It adds some diversity to the updates and gives readers something new to look at. 2. The Tweets are much more conversational than the blog entries are. I find them almost easier and even more enjoyable to read. 3. The blog does not differentiate between what reporter is reporting what information; it seems more of a collaboration effort. The Tweets are very individualized, providing headshots and screen names.
Similarities:
1. Both are being updated every few minutes, giving readers the newest information as it comes. 2. Both cover the most important quotes of the night. 3. Both coverages keep posts short and simple, so readers remain interested.
Differences:
ReplyDelete1. Clearly one of the most notably differences is that the Tweets incorporate photos, whereas the live blog does not.
2. The Tweets are also more comedic and colloquial ("My daughter's available" - Scott Brown and "They call her Martha Choakley.")
3. The live blog also has more hard facts and analysis of them (8:45 p.m. -- A bad omen for Coakley in Boston's western suburbs? Take the town of Ashland, where Brown won 3,467-2,897. That's a turnaround from Democratic Governor Deval Patrick's 3,118-2,329 victory over Kerry Healey in 2006. And similar to Republican Governor Mitt Romney's 3,734-2,295 win over Shannon O'Brien in 2002.)
Similarities:
1. Both forms of coverage contain quotes; however, the quotes in the live blog are considerably longer than those in the Tweets. 2. They both have the exact time the information was updated, each media outlet is updating their content approximately every 5 minutes (but usually less.)
3. They also both give a summary of what's going on as it happens (like the poll percentages.)
The two platforms of journalism varied greatly.
ReplyDeleteSimilarities:
-Both platforms were relatively BRIEF--there were no long reports or essays on specifics.
-Both platforms include key quotes from the political candidates.
-Both platforms included posts by a group of journalists--not even just one or a couple journalists. They probably did this so they would have more thorough coverage.
Differences:
-The Tweets are more "modern" with the hashtags. People who do not understand Twitter would maybe not understand hashtags.
-The Globe piece did not include photos--something that actually surprised me a lot.
-The tweeting platform is more PERSONAL. It features the faces of each person who is posting, as well as the names they use to post. The Globe piece is more vague--the reader cannot tell which journalist gathered which post/update.
Differences:
ReplyDelete1) The use of Twitpics is obviously the most striking difference between the student coverage and the Globe's live blog. While Twitter might have limited the text a user can post, Twitpic opens a new door for quick news updates.
2) The Globe's posts were more in-depth and harder than the Tweets. The Globe coverage was more analytical and gave me a better idea of how the election was going.
3) Organizationally, the Tweets on coveritlive.com went from earliest to latest update, where the Globe's latest update was the first thing on the page.
Similarities:
1) Both groups updated their blogs frequently, though the Globe was more consistent in updating every few minutes... When there was not much to report at the scene, the student reporting would stop.
2) Both were collaborative efforts. The two platforms would have been impossible without a good team.
3) While the two groups used different tones and different platforms, they generally picked up on and reported on the same things.
Differences:
ReplyDelete* The use of pictures was the first striking difference, the coveritlive.com tweets gave the reader/viewer a sense of actually being there, even without reading a single tweet.
* The coveritlive.com tweets were more about what was happening. A more soft news approach, while the Globe gave quotes and facts to cover the election. There was some overlap of information on the coveritlive.com blog.
* The layout and the tweeting by different reporters was easy to distinguish on the coveritlive.com blog, whereas on the Globe blog, the tweets were uniform.
Similarities:
* Each updated at around the same time and at the same speed
* Started and ended the tweets at around the same time
* Both gave detailed accounts of what was going on, information that would be interesting to even someone who was in attendance.
Similarities:
ReplyDelete1) Both examples of coverage are collective. The number of reporters present at Coakley and Brown headquarters allowed for near continuous coverage. Both tweeted or updated their coverage every few minutes.
2) Both groups found the same general events to be newsworthy. For example, both reported information about the election returns as they filtered in.
3) The tweeted coverage and blog coverage started and ended around the same time.
Differences:
1) The student coverage included photos, while the Globe coverage did not. Including a visual element helps your readers understand more about the environment and mood (I took one of the pictures, and I wish I could have posted more)!
2) The tweets were shorter and more general in nature. They expressed what happened in that precise moment, rather than future casting or dwelling on the actions or opinions surrounding the campaign.
3) The Globe’s coverage was analytical, and mostly comprised of quotes from officials and a clarifying sentence here and there. The tweets, on the other hand, were clearly the voice of the reporter. They were more informal, humorous, and sensory (the only coverage that gave a real “feel” for the atmosphere of the event).
Differences:
ReplyDelete1. I agree with what has been mentioned earlier: the Tweeted coverage is visually more interesting thanks to the use of pictures and easier to read due to its short sentences.
2. The style of writing is also very different: the Globe's coverage is more complete and includes more hard facts, longer quotes. The Tweets are individual, more personal; in the Globe's coverage we don't know exactly who wrote what. And the platform in itself allows the reporters to communicate with each other (ex. when Tyler asks if Brown won).
3. the chronological order differs too: In the Globe the latest updates come first whereas the tweets start from the beginning.
Similarities:
1. The two platforms allow the coverage of two different events ( Coakley's HQ and Brown's HQ) at the same time.
2. Both platforms give regular updates and started/ended around the same time.
3. None of them included background information; the two formats are meant for breaking news or horse race type of coverage.
Differences:
ReplyDelete1. The tweets are a compilation of several contriubutors, whereas the Globe's live coverage seems to have been produced by one person.
2. Both the tweets and the Globe's live coverage are arranged by time; however, the tweets are arranged in chronological time order and the Globe's live coverage is arranged in reverse time order.
3. The tweets, as already mentioned, are more visually pleasing. There is a mix of text entries and photograph entries. The Globe's live coverage is more dry and solely has text.
Similarities:
1. Both the tweets and the Globe's live coverage highlight major ongoings such as polls of who was winning and then the final results of who won.
2. Although they aim to accomplish it in different manners, both the tweets and the Globe's live coverage verbally illustrate the mood in their respective locations. One tweet says, "crowd screaming go Scott Brown." In the Globe's coverage, one entry states, "The mood at the Coakley part is subdued."
3. Both the tweets and the Globe's coverage include direct quotations.