NYTimes.com News Track

Final NYTimes. com News Track-4-28-13

The New York Times website, as I’ve said previously in these news tracks, seemingly enjoys holding on to its traditions. It doesn’t seem to have too much ingenuity for an online newspaper but it also doesn’t lag light years behind.

They have the basic interactive features, always linking to Twitter, Facebook and allowing people to comment. Their journalists are active on Twitter (I follow Nate Taylor and Howard Beck) for example and they tweet and curate with great regularity. Their multimedia page is filled appropriately with a slew of unique video and still photos all over their site. They covered their graphs and charts with decent regularity. All in all they’ve decently covered all of the aspects that serve as additions to their print and text versions.

Yet the main thing I’ve noticed about the site is that they don’t really try to do anything new or exciting. They don’t really attempt to expand their site in anyway but reporting more information. I understand why they probably do it, because their clientele is more made up of older, professionals who may or may not have embraced the explosive and sometimes overwhelming social media age we’re entering. For now, I don’t see this lack of online creativity as a problem. But as our younger generation grows older, they must up their interactive and visual creatively or see other sites like the Huffington Post and Buzzfeed surpass their readership.

It’s difficult to go against such a storied and prestigious paper like the New York Times, but nothing about this site screams at me to regularly view it. Being a part of a generation whose attention span has been basically broken down to 140 characters or the maximum length of a tweet, I can’t see why NYTimes.com would be my first choice.

In this class we covered how to get more online readership, while not violating the pillars of journalism. Yes, they do serve all three of the pillars, but on-demand and interactivity are covered a lot more effectively than multimedia. In this day and age, I think that multimedia serves as the most important pillar since it’s easier to capture the attention of our generation with a lot of different media components converging to tell one story. Some people like watching videos, some like listening to audio, some like simply looking at pictures. But the whole point is to have all of those out there so at the bare minimum your readers will be engaged with at least one form of media. I just don’t think NYTimes.com did that in the most complete way they could.

In conclusion, the site is just too geared for the older generation for it to really be a leader in online journalism. Change will have to come soon if they want to continue to be a global leader in journalism.

NYTimes.com News Track-4/14/13

After checking out the video section, I next looked at the photography section. The photos were clearly well taken and procured, but I’m not sure they exactly followed all the rules we discussed in class.

For one, many of these photos don’t respect the rule of thirds. Many of them have their main subject clearly in the middle of the photo, making for a somewhat boring look. It wasn’t a universal thing with all the photos I looked at but the issue had some consistency throughout. Some of them didn’t have a clear subject and looked as if they were just randomly taken. In a few pictures the lighting was oddly configured, but I assume that was for artistic purposes. I was also disappointed to see that they didn’t have very many detailed shots; a majority of the shots were taken at medium range with the rest being wide shots. Out of around 100 photos I looked at, only four or five were taken with great detail in mind.

Now I wouldn’t necessarily claim that any of these pictures were staged, but them being so impressive, so random and yet so perfect that it’s hard to believe every single one of these was just a real catch. Then again I guess when you take thousands of pictures like these NY Times journalist most likely do, you’re going to have some absolutely unbelievable stills.  I also noticed that the pictures are all pretty much at the same straightforward angle, lacking some creativity in that regard. The fact that a majority of these captured moments are so awe-inspiring just in their content, it’s hard to nitpick these small things. I do think that they could have done a better job of switching up the angles and distances.

It’s pretty interesting that a big time news medium can miss out on basic creative elements, but then again when you’re capturing intense and sometimes wonderful events it’s hard to think the audience is going to call you out for your lack of artistic additions. Maybe it’s just that their photo-taking style at NYTimes.com is to keep it truly real, even in the most direct sense. I don’t mind it because I’m not big on photography, but I’m sure critics would jump on this lack of creativity.

I will say one positive thing that these photographers did was look out for distracting backgrounds. Their “main” subject might not always be so clear, but the backgrounds of these pictures don’t really distract the audience’s eye. That probably positively adds to the intensity of these pictures.

NYTimes.com News Track-3/31/13

This week I decided to check out how the Times displays their reporting visually through their short video features. Of course the Times has a lot of resources so their quality of video is outstanding. Some of the videos consist simply of a reporter and an expert talking in sort of a round table discussion. Others are actually investigative reports with both interviews of the subject and narration by a reporter. In those feature-type videos the b-roll shots are extensive, which makes the story being told come to life in more ways than one. They also switched it up by throwing in pictures to truly capture powerful moments.

For the New York Times, this should be a huge component of their online features and I don’t think it’s utilized enough. The video page isn’t exactly prominent within the home page, when I think it should be. As for the quality and production value of the videos, it’s through the roof. There is so much technology and money available to these NY Times reporters that it really allows to distribute a wealth of information to a reader in only a five-to-ten minute video. Especially with America’s shortening attention span, these videos should be the primary feature on the site. People would rather watch a feature for eight minutes then read a six-page article about the same thing. Plus when you see how well made these videos are, you’d think they’d have these videos in a prominent location on the home page.

My best guess is that the Times wants to keep its integrity and tradition as a text-based news outlet. I understand that, but just because a media outlet puts a little bit more time doesn’t mean that it’s going to lose it’s traditional values. As long as they produce well-researched and produced videos, which they do, then their keep with the traditional values of journalism. So while they do make quality videos, they need to increase the quantity.

I have been critiquing the paper’s lack of innovative online features, but this isn’t one. Their visuals such as graphs and pictures are high quality, but not of a high quantity. If they want to gain readership of the up-and-coming young generation, they need to really up the ante on these types of visually enticing features.

NYTimes.com News Track-3/24/13

Since the NCAA Tournament and its March Madness are a big part of national headlines this week and this month I decided to see how the NYTimes.com covered it.

I immediately noticed a section headlined, “The Quad,” and I liked it a lot. It was the live blog of the NCAA Tournament and I thought the title of the section was quite clever. The live blogging that was constantly updated was really great. It was instant, quality analysis which was probably the same as two tweets worth of information. Zach Hillesland was the reporter on duty on Sunday and he did a great job varying his blog post between longer analytic ones and quicker ones that just highlighted a big play or something that needed to be talked about immediately. He would also post pictures from Times photographers and tweets from other Times writers giving even more versatility to this blog. This was a section that you could get lost in either following it or back-tracking on it.

Returning to the home page I saw the features-type stories that dominated the scroll on the left side, which is to be expected. On the right side they had the day’s scoreboard, with almost instant up-to-date changes to the score and time of live games. They also had links to a ticket website and a feed from A.P. and Reuters as well as a top ten list of the most popular recent sports stories. This most popular list was also broken down into the most blogged stories, the most emailed stories and the most viewed stories. I thought that was an interesting way to compile a list based on readership.

I was actually surprised with the amount of unique content that they had on their NCAA Tournament section. I was really impressed with the live blog which worked as a more in-depth version of Twitter and really allowed a viewer to get some quality reaction from analysts. The feature stories were also a lot more creative than I originally expected. Since sports is a bit of a lighter topic, I like when reporters dive into their clever writing styles and tactics when they’re covering sports.

All in all the site took a quality, in-depth approach for something that gets a lot of attention even though it isn’t exactly the New York Times’ expertise like politics or the economy is.

NYTimes.com News Track-3/17/13

For this news track I decided to talk about how they handled a major breaking news event. In this case it was the election of the new pope on Wednesday. This of course dominated the home page with a large slideshow that showed the unveiling of the pope, the frenzied crowd and early pictures when the crowd first gathered outside the Vatican.

Below the slideshow there is the main article, followed by their signature Timecast piece which is a video report from a journalist that’s on site at the Vatican. There’s also a link to one of the blogs which, in a light manner, discusses the already active twitter of the newly elected pope. Below that they have a link to a chart which shows how much of the Catholic population growth has come in Latin America, which fits perfectly with the election of a South American pope. This chart also comes with a map that visually compares the increase of Latino Catholics vs. the primarily Catholic Europe in 1900. This is one of the better and more effective charts I’ve seen NYTimes.com produce.

I thought that the NYTimes.com handled such a major breaking news event pretty well. Within an hour of the pope’s selection that had a variety of charts, articles, blog posts and multimedia features that properly portrayed the event in its immediacy. There was a quality, in-depth article within 20 minutes of the election of the pope and that’s vital in a situation such as this, especially for many people who couldn’t view a television screen. I’m sure they will have a blow out edition in the print version on Thursday, but their immediate coverage of this ultra-important event was great.

Another interactive feature they made relatively prominent was the reader comment feature, which was right on the front page under the primary article. Usually you don’t see interactive features right on the main article, but the Times understands how many people will have a comment about this and that’s important. Also on the actual article page they had a few more multimedia options than usual because of the importance of this event.

NYTimes.com News Track-3/3/13

For this week I decided to do an in-depth analysis on one of their feature articles. This particular feature was pertaining to Virginia’s growing economic woes because of the pending sequestration.

The first thing I noticed is the use of hyperlinks. Obviously this has become a basic feature of news sites these days, but some of them abuse hyperlinks which is both stylistically unappealing and also annoying. The Times does a good job of finding a balancing between linking important links and keeping the story’s integrity. In total they only had six hyperlinks which, for a story of this length and style, is a good amount.

Next I checked out a chart that they had on the side showing sequestration’s impact on different states. Honestly the chart was a little weak even though it does help support the article. I think a more in-depth chart or an option to change the type of chart would make it a bit more effective. For a publication that prides itself on being sophisticated and complex I thought this feature was oddly simple.

On the other side of the article was the feature to share the story via Facebook, Twitter, Google-plus and other sites. Obviously another normal, but necessary feature.

The best feature I discovered wasn’t really directed solely at the article, but the topic of politics in general. They have links to different sections on the topic of politics with some being blogs, others charts and more with video. Politics is a big part of their journalistic repertoire so their emphasis on the topic and versatility of features concerning the topic is vital. Plus, I enjoy the visuals in these sections which really catches your attention with colors, entertaining cartoons and the like.

NYTimes.com News Track-2/24/13

New York Times is widely known as a national and global newspaper that covers all topics from all parts of the world, but I often think there’s a part of the Times that’s often overlooked, the fact that this is a New York paper. With that thought in my head I went and checked out the N.Y./region section which covers New York as in the manner of a local paper and not a national one.

They pretty much market this section of the site as its own entity, which I believe is a smart idea. This allows for New Yorkers to feel as if their paper hasn’t sold out and has forgotten about them. They’ve got five “Metro” columnists that each cover different topics on their designated day. For them to deploy five writers just to cover the city it gives the reader a chance to get to know their hometown columnists quite well.

This regional site looks a lot like the home page with the features right there in the middle as well as the featured column for the day. They’ve also placed a twitter feed for their reporters on the right side. Just like the homepage, they have multimedia particularly concerning the region and the number of visuals they have is not lacking.

One of the key features of the N.Y./Region section is the City Room, which is a live blog from the five boroughs updating the happenings around the city immediately. It’s an easily accessible mixture of video, pictures, news updates and features that allows the reader quick scrolling. For the New Yorkers with little time to get their news, this is an essential feature. They also have a calendar of events for upcoming art and entertainment events that they call “Noteworthy cultural events.”

For a New York only section, I think it taps into the pulse of the city quite well. Things can be raw in New York City at time, especially in the winter and I think many of these slideshows and stories show this. Yet at the same time the section does a good job of exposing the cool and funky aspects hidden in the alleyways and pop-up shops in New York.

Even though the New York Times has expanded itself into one of the most wide-read papers in the world, it cannot lose its New York backing. This section does a quality job of reminding people that this is a New York paper.

NYTimes.com News Track-2/17/13

I explored the multimedia section on the site and found a few interesting things. They have a feature called “The Weekly Health Quiz,” which quizzes you on the recent health topics that have emerged over the past week or so. It would be interesting to see how well frequent readers of NYTimes.com  do on this quiz versus people that read other papers. There’s the thought that the educated people who read the New York Times would be knowledgeable and healthy, but I’m not sure.

Another interactive feature that’s intriguing is their  review of page 1 in 2012. This shows all the best front pages of the New York Times over the past year. It’s always cool to look back on all the memories of the past year. You also can get more specific and click on different themes of Page 1’s such as conflicts, investigation or for this year the election.

They also had a interactive feature that was called “Build A Pop Song,” in which you can put together your own songs with different sounds and samples. This section is headed by a video with one of the biggest producers in all of music, Kuk Harrell. This is the stuff that can really make the site enjoyable and can make it a place where you lose track of time. Unfortunately they don’t have a ton of interactive features, I think that is one area they definitely should add to and promote more intensely.

The “Lens Blog” is the site’s picture blog and they do a “Picture of the Day” everyday. It’s nothing that’s going to get you out of your seat with excitement, but it’s nice to be able to find all the pictures in one spot. Focusing stories around photos is one effective way to capture the attention of our generation who’s attention span has almost disappeared.

So for my third news track and the third week I’ve really traversed this site I think I understand the pulse of this site and it’s not much different from the paper itself. They are really all there for business and the site is really void of any riff-raff that floods some of the other news websites. So if you really just want to read well-reported journalism, NYTimes.com doesn’t differ much from its print counterpart. I’m interested to see at what rate they change their site and add new features. I would assume, with their traditional style, that it wouldn’t be too often, as they haven’t really changed anything in the three weeks I’ve been watching it.

NYTimes.com News Track-2/10/13

The New York Times has often been considered the paper of the well educated and it makes sense to why the paper is dominate by politics and the economy. As you would assume, the site is exactly the same. The central column may not always be political, but the the side column labeled “News Analysis” is almost always political. As for the economy, on the right side of the homepage they have an interactive feature which allows you to the check both the domestic and global markets as well as letting you check the currency rates.

With this tough economy, everyone has an eye on the market and the ability that the site gives you for tracking the market while your checking the news is vital. What makes it better is that if you’re a member of their site, you can log your portfolio into the site and you’ll be able to directly track your stocks. This is something that makes the site a legitimate hub of information and a necessary destination for educated people.

On Sunday’s there’s the Sunday Review which is a signature part of the New York Times print version, so it’s important for them to feature it as they do in the top right corner. You can click on the section and it’ll direct you to a page that has the same artistic style as the Sunday Review always has had. When the print version was the more accessible version of New York Times media, the weekend paper and Sunday Review were a must-have. Here it allows the reader to feel like they’re receiving that same weekend feel even without having it in print form. I think it’s important for a paper like the New York Times not to sacrifice style and tradition for gimmicks and new features. The Sunday Review section does a good job of helping them balance that.

Another thing I’ve noticed is the option of viewing today’s paper, which once again gives the reader a feel of the print version. I’m sure that feature would be enjoyed by the Times older readers who enjoy the tradition of reading a paper and not simply streamlined news. This option is located at the top of the home page along with a few other tabs for videos and the most popular stories as well.

NYTimes.com News Track- 2/3/13

The absolute first impression of NYTimes.com is that it has an incredible amount of words and pictures making it hard to initially comprehend the site. Once your eyes settle in on the site, though, you realize there is a purpose to main page’s display.

Right down the middle of the homepage is the day’s most important stories, some are breaking news, others are features. On the left side of the page they’ve got almost every topic imaginable with the more general topics in bold and the more specific topics in a lighter gray color. The site is quite manageable and has a classy look to it, reminds me a lot of the way the paper produces its print version.

I wouldn’t say that the site has any cutting edge features, but isn’t ancient either. One of the most important features is the one which informs the reader of the last time the article was updated. In these times where readers want their information to be as up-to-date as possible, this is a basic, yet essential feature. Once you’ve actually clicked on an article, it gives you the opportunity to share the article on Facebook, tweet it out or share it on Google-plus. Again, all basic, but important features. Another small, but unique part of articles on the site is the picture placement. On most sites the picture appears enlarged on the top of the page and forces you to scroll down to read the story. On the New York Times article pages it gives you the option to click on the picture to enlarge it, but if you’re not interested in the photo it will remain a thumbnail, allowing you read the article efficiently. It’s a small component, but it is vital to the readers who don’t have much time to scroll.

In terms of interactivity, the New York Times dedicates a whole section to it with polls, photos, video and other multimedia. But that’s as far as they go with interactivity and I don’t mind it. This is a well-respected newspaper’s website and it doesn’t needed to be flooded with comments. Readers can interact with reporters via Twitter and that’s a much cleaner way to respond to readers’ comments.

One other feature I thought was pretty interesting, was that you could shift between the U.S. edition and the global edition. We all know easily the world is connected, but I as a reader would enjoy reading about news from the world’s perspective from time to time.