A commentary on online delivery: Global Voices, Russia and the Panama Papers

By Laura Syvaniemi

Student ID 440582669

Näyttökuva 2016-04-05 kello 10.50.42

This piece posted by Tetyana Lokot on GlobalVoices.org as part of RuNet Echo, attempts an easily scannable and visually broken down style of delivery but loses its message amidst its Twitter screenshots.

Lokot breaks down her news post by screencapping tweets from a wide array of different sources, some verified Twitter accounts but most not. Hyperlinks to give context and authority to these sources would have made for more informative, engaging and trustworthy reading (Rohumaa & Bradshaw, 2011, p. 38).

Text boxes containing translations of the Russian tweets are necessary, however their visual delivery is cramped and out of proportion. The amount of boxes and visuals overwhelms the piece itself, reducing it to a commentary without a strong common thread. The piece could also do with some subheading to break down its different themes and sections for comprehensive reading and multiple entry points into the text (Rohumaa & Bradshaw, 2011, p. 37).

Social media sharing icons and choices to engage with the article and writer are provided and hyperlinks are provided well throughout the piece, except for the repetitive links to the Twitter hashtag #panamapapers where one would be sufficient.

 

Word count: 190

Reference:

Rohumaa, L., & Bradshaw, P. (2011). Writing for the web. In Online Journalism Handbook: Skills to survive and thrive in the digital age (pp. 29-46). Routledge.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “A commentary on online delivery: Global Voices, Russia and the Panama Papers

  1. Laura, thanks for the comment piece.

    I agree with you that Lokot’s story is overwhelmed by the great amount of embedded tweets. Further, the tweet boxes (and translations) are proportionally big in size, which might bury the short paragraphs (only 1-2 lines) in between when readers scroll/scan through the article. Since there is no sub-headings used in the story, as you mentioned, it is possible that readers be made confused and misled in the case that they miss a particular paragraph which prompts for a change of sub-theme/sub-topic.

    However, regarding the embedding of tweets in the story, I would argue that the tweets posted by “non-verified” are acceptable in this case, since Lokot is intended to quote some ordinary citizens or Twitter users’ responses towards the incident.

    After all, multimedia elements are used well, which engages readers, although there might be too many hyperlinks embedded. Photos and images are included well.

    It is also good that GlobalVoices has enabled comment boxes and social media sharing buttons to encourage user interactivity and engagement.

    Like

  2. Great post! I agree with you on how the article loses its message with all of the Twitter links. I found the article interesting because in most platforms you might see a lack of multimedia, but this is a good example of how too many media elements might be detrimental to deliver a story. To support this analysis, I use what Rohumaa and Bradshaw mentioned on page 42, about choosing elements for the story and getting the story right.

    I also think that a use of headlines that divided the Tweets by themes could help the story, or maybe present the story with separate updates or bulletpoints to make it more organised.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s