|
Attacks, aftermath, anthrax, airport security, Afghanistan, America. Until the next unimaginable event occurs just about everything related to September 11 nearly two months later fits into one of these categories. Covering the crisis is becoming routine and media consumers are moving farther and farther away from 24/7 news saturation as they try to recover some balance and find their own definition of the new normal. But normal is tough to define when the newsroom you work in is being tested for anthrax, or metal detectors are being installed at the entrance to the building. The usual breathing space between major story twists that could offer news Web sites the chance to reorganize or retool may be needed just to recover and be fresh enough to meet the next set of challenges. That could explain why so much of the coverage at Web sites connected with cable or television news resembles a house with rooms of varying size, purpose and architecture tacked on as money comes in. Sticking with the templates already in place and the usual tricks of the trade -- catchy titles, prominent graphics, lots of multimedia -- section after section has been added on as events warrant. Rearranging all of that furniture would help several sites (and their users). Is it the best use of time and resources for staffs already stretched to the breaking point? Probably not, although it is to be hoped that each organization is looking at the results of the last eight weeks with an eye towards improvement. That?s not meant to detract from the often-incredible performance under very difficult circumstances, the kind of performance that only comes with experience. No one had to reinvent the wheel this time. The result is as uneven as most of us feel these days. CNN.com may come the closest to getting it right with a clear, coherent package presented simply and well. CBSnews.com takes an interesting approach with its suggestion that users ?experience? a story. Foxnews.com offers a nice touch here and there but not as much depth as some of the others. ABCnews.com and MSNBC.com both continue a tradition of good work. Key to every site are the network videos of newscasts, show segments and various reports. While repurposing may be frowned upon in some quarters, for me, a great deal of the appeal of these particular sites comes from the ability to put together my own free-ranging newscast at my convenience. Better than time-shifting, which means I record a newscast to watch when it works for me and then never find the time, it?s as close to video on demand as some of us are going to get for a long time. If I prefer the transportation coverage on NBC, the medical coverage of CNN and the White House correspondent on ABC, I can make it happen. Ditto for the way other news elements are presented online. If I have the patience and the time I can pick through the variations I like best and visit each site for its strengths. Envision that ?if? in 72-point Futura Bold caps, though. Grazing just isn?t practical for most users, especially those with an interest in multimedia content, and it won?t be until watching video, listening to audio or using interactive elements is as standard and simple as opening the newspaper or working the remote. Take my efforts to watch Lee Cowan?s fine, repurposed report on cbsnews.com. Opening the Real Player video to full screen crashed my computer. Twice. It didn?t get a third chance. If I want to watch video on cbsnews.com it will be in the tiny, hard-to-see box, which probably means I?ll skip it next time. MSNBC.com wants me to rely on Windows Media Player. ABCnews.com?s Real Player zooms quite nicely. CNN.com lets me pick between Real, Quicktime and Windows. None are pure joy at ISDN speeds or slower but the quality is much better than it used to be at slow speeds. There should be a limit on the number of moving elements on any page at any given time. Maybe I?m shallow but it?s hard to focus on the usually fine work offered by msnbc.com when msn butterflies are fluttering, program notes are rotating and banner ads are taking turns. Ditto for CBSnews.com and its no fewer than five moving front-page elements. The part of me that desperately wants news Web sites to make money is in direct conflict with the part that gets distracted by the way the retail space is being used. The visual noise can -- and often does -- drown out the strong graphic center image much like a too-loud soundtrack diverts attention in a movie theater. Some of this may seep through because the people designing or producing the sites have become inured to the moving clutter just like the movie usher who no longer flinches when she enters the theater and hears loud gunfire. Get past that and most of the time MSNBC.com is worth the trip. No need to hunt through screens for video or audio headlines or the MSNBC cable feed. In a nice touch, going to live video also provides links to services like NASA TV or NDTV News live from India. MSNBC.com earns points with me just for having a design that fits all the major elements in one screen on a standard monitor and almost fits on my subnotebook. The long scrolling pages, usually made manageable by section links at the top, don?t appear until you venture further into the site. The complete coverage package includes a sweeping glance at all of the special sections in a graphic nav bar of sorts. The top items show the site?s priorities MSNBC Complete Coverage, Newsweek, and MSN America Responds. The others aren?t in any readily apparent order with multiple 9-11 reefers -- coping with 9-11, 9/11/01, In Memoriam searchable list, images of the attack and aftermath -- and others mixed together. ABCnews.com takes full advantage of the Web with one of the most striking features found on any of the sites: PhotoFlash, a weekly montage of images that scroll slowly across the screen horizontally in a three-inch strip. The user can click on the images that draw his or her attention like the refugee behind a veil or, for a smile, the polar bear cub swimming up to look at a little girl in a window without having to shuffle through a slideshow. Don?t get me wrong. I?m not against slideshows, particularly those focused on a single topic but the photo crawl offers an easy, innovative access point to images the user might otherwise miss altogether. Another ABCnews.com feature pieces together text, video and audio to highlight the reportage of author Sebastian Junger on assignment for ABC in Afghanistan. Of particular interest: an audio slideshow with dramatic voiceover by Junger that oddly requires manual forwarding of the images instead of syncing with the audio. Each picture has a cutline that doesn?t necessarily track with Junger?s commentary. For a cosmic moment (especially if you?re on strong cold medication or the like) check out the CBSnews.com bulletin board on the war. The first image is a sea of red numbers resembling an ad for Target. In reality, it?s a map of the forum that lets any message become an entry point. That means if you absolutely have to read message number 196, you can do it without passing go or paying $200. Well, not really. Turns out what appears to be message markers actually represent groups of 10. You go to a screen with 10 messages that aren?t numbered and you can guess which one is 196; registered users can see the post markers. Anyone however can play topic roulette by picking back or next and jumping to a mystery discussion. Even better, you can mark all messages in a forum as read. Trust me, it?s better than trying to read most of them but that?s a subject for another day. Cbsnews.com also has a new use for the U.S. flag as a clickable icon that displays an interactive menu for descriptions of military special forces. The brief descriptions verge on the vacuous and would benefit from links to deeper content offsite for those who want to know more about PsyOps or the SEALS. One Foxnews.com offer strikes a similarly jarring note. Hover over the prominently displayed ?Sign up to be a FOX fan? and you can ?Stay informed! Sign up for e-mail updates on FNC?s continuing coverage of the war on terror.? This might go over better if foxnews.com flat out suggested signing up for news alerts. On the other hand, it says a lot about the site?s personality-and-show-based approach, which meshes more closely with its network than other sites with theirs. Sign up for the alerts not because they?re the best or the most timely but because you like Foxnews.com best. Similarly, the ?top stories? are really links to various FNC shows with a nod at headlines. Fox adds to the sense of connection by adding an extra icon to Fox-original stories that links to e-mail programs so users can let the editor know what they think. In a way, Foxnews.com may be doing its job better than any of the others. It wouldn?t be my first or second choice if I planned to rely on a single site for the bulk of my information but I can see how it would work as a companion for viewers who rely on FNC as their main news source. Any one of the other sites, especially MSNBC.com with its ties to NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, Newsweek and the Washington Post, and CNN.com with its links to Time and the other AOL Time Warner properties, would be enough for someone who wants a comfortable daily place to visit, catch up on the news and occasionally to go beyond the headlines.
|
Article Feed
