Guest guest Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 I also hate this new video thing the news websites are coming out with. I can guess what is driving it: People's impatience to have to read these exceedingly long (he says sarcastically) one and two paragraph news stories. I don't think video is entirely representative of news events, especially when there is some sort of disaster being reported on. The camera focuses on the biggest flame or gets the most exciting comments, etc., and somewhere along the way facts get lost or go unheard. Tom Administrator I was looking up some stories today and several of them were video versions. Now, these were things that could have been presented in written text without losing anything. I also didn't watch most of them because my preference is to read things like that. This is mostly because I read faster than people talk and I can take my time with the information, pausing to think about a passage or rereading a section until I understand it. Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about is mainly online stories, news and otherwise. I would much rather read the story or a transcript that watch the video almost all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 In a message dated 10/13/2006 5:46:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: Yes (I think I mentioned before) I avoid watching the news - I very rarely get newspapers. I sometimes hear the news on the radio and I much prefer to look up a newstory on the web and read. I used to read the newspaper every day, until they switched to soy-based ink. Since then, the smell of the ink gags me and even the paper is unpleasant to touch. I don't often watch the TV news unless something local has happened or there is a hurricane coming, a storm or something like that. The rest of the time I get news from the web and since I check email several times per day anyway, it is no difficulty to check the headlines too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 " Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about is mainly online stories, news and otherwise. " Yes (I think I mentioned before) I avoid watching the news - I very rarely get newspapers. I sometimes hear the news on the radio and I much prefer to look up a newstory on the web and read. > > I was looking up some stories today and several of them were video versions. > Now, these were things that could have been presented in written text > without losing anything. I also didn't watch most of them because my preference is > to read things like that. This is mostly because I read faster than people > talk and I can take my time with the information, pausing to think about a > passage or rereading a section until I understand it. > > Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about > is mainly online stories, news and otherwise. I would much rather read the > story or a transcript that watch the video almost all the time. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 Absolutley! History channel is great for me because I have read about the subjects they present for the most part and the visuals help create an impact. I can remember most articles I read but unless I discuss them with someone else the details become hazy. I also read, then reread passages after I give them some thought to be sure in my mind that I did not misinterpret the meaning. Kim > > I was looking up some stories today and several of them were video versions. > Now, these were things that could have been presented in written text > without losing anything. I also didn't watch most of them because my preference is > to read things like that. This is mostly because I read faster than people > talk and I can take my time with the information, pausing to think about a > passage or rereading a section until I understand it. > > Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about > is mainly online stories, news and otherwise. I would much rather read the > story or a transcript that watch the video almost all the time. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2006 Report Share Posted October 14, 2006 RE Smells. Noise. Lately I find the smell of gasoline fumes almost intolerable. Let alone the traffic noise. I've been going out to catch the bus wearing ear-protectors (reduction of 25 decibels, 8 dollars at Wal-Mart) and a nice handkerchief (with a picture of an indian "chief") a little tucked under each of the ear pods. I know I look like some kind of total geek, but fortunately that doesn't bother me any. I store the handkerchief overnight in a coffee can with some mulling spices. Heph VISIGOTH@... wrote: In a message dated 10/13/2006 5:46:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16ntlworld writes: Yes (I think I mentioned before) I avoid watching the news - I very rarely get newspapers. I sometimes hear the news on the radio and I much prefer to look up a newstory on the web and read. I used to read the newspaper every day, until they switched to soy-based ink. Since then, the smell of the ink gags me and even the paper is unpleasant to touch. I don't often watch the TV news unless something local has happened or there is a hurricane coming, a storm or something like that. The rest of the time I get news from the web and since I check email several times per day anyway, it is no difficulty to check the headlines too. Hephaestus Clubfoothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestushttp://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hephaestus.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabeiroi Get your email and more, right on the new .com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2006 Report Share Posted October 14, 2006 Reading v. Video The tv news industry is a disgrace. All that's left is C-Span I and II. The newspapers are somewhat paper, but they too have gone downhill. I most enjoy watching a good interview on C-Span. Next to that- there was a period in my life, about 15 years, where I read at least three papers a day. (NYT, LA times, and WSJ.) But for the last few years I've been reading newspapers very little. I agree that newspaper articles are great because I can read much faster than news announcers talk. But at age 51 my eyes, after a long life of focusing close-up, are extremely near-sighted. I read using bifocals, but I've never got fully comfortable with them. So now I prefer a good C-Span interview or panel discussion. I sort of save all my reading for the internet- about 5 hours a day. Heph greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> wrote: "Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about is mainly online stories, news and otherwise."Yes (I think I mentioned before) I avoid watching the news - I very rarely get newspapers. I sometimes hear the news on the radio and I much prefer to look up a newstory on the web and read.>> I was looking up some stories today and several of them were video versions. > Now, these were things that could have been presented in written text > without losing anything. I also didn't watch most of them because my preference is > to read things like that. This is mostly because I read faster than people > talk and I can take my time with the information, pausing to think about a > passage or rereading a section until I understand it. > > Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about > is mainly online stories, news and otherwise. I would much rather read the > story or a transcript that watch the video almost all the time. > > >Hephaestus Clubfoothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestushttp://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hephaestus.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabeiroi Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2006 Report Share Posted October 14, 2006 Reading v. Video The tv news industry is a disgrace. All that's left is C-Span I and II. The newspapers are somewhat paper, but they too have gone downhill. I most enjoy watching a good interview on C-Span. Next to that- there was a period in my life, about 15 years, where I read at least three papers a day. (NYT, LA times, and WSJ.) But for the last few years I've been reading newspapers very little. I agree that newspaper articles are great because I can read much faster than news announcers talk. But at age 51 my eyes, after a long life of focusing close-up, are extremely near-sighted. I read using bifocals, but I've never got fully comfortable with them. So now I prefer a good C-Span interview or panel discussion. I sort of save all my reading for the internet- about 5 hours a day. Heph greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> wrote: "Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about is mainly online stories, news and otherwise."Yes (I think I mentioned before) I avoid watching the news - I very rarely get newspapers. I sometimes hear the news on the radio and I much prefer to look up a newstory on the web and read.>> I was looking up some stories today and several of them were video versions. > Now, these were things that could have been presented in written text > without losing anything. I also didn't watch most of them because my preference is > to read things like that. This is mostly because I read faster than people > talk and I can take my time with the information, pausing to think about a > passage or rereading a section until I understand it. > > Is anyone else like that? TV programs are different. What I am talking about > is mainly online stories, news and otherwise. I would much rather read the > story or a transcript that watch the video almost all the time. > > >Hephaestus Clubfoothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestushttp://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hephaestus.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabeiroi Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2006 Report Share Posted October 14, 2006 I find interviews are definately worth watching, and if you do watch, you will quickly see that if that specific interview is quoted at any length in news papers or news clips, it is only the quotable quotes that are used. Sometimes these quotes do not reflect what the person actually said. Thus I like to hear the whole interview if I can. Tom Administrator Re: Re: Reading vs. video Reading v. Video The tv news industry is a disgrace. All that's left is C-Span I and II. The newspapers are somewhat paper, but they too have gone downhill. I most enjoy watching a good interview on C-Span. Next to that- there was a period in my life, about 15 years, where I read at least three papers a day. (NYT, LA times, and WSJ.) But for the last few years I've been reading newspapers very little. I agree that newspaper articles are great because I can read much faster than news announcers talk. But at age 51 my eyes, after a long life of focusing close-up, are extremely near-sighted. I read using bifocals, but I've never got fully comfortable with them. So now I prefer a good C-Span interview or panel discussion. I sort of save all my reading for the internet- about 5 hours a day. Heph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2006 Report Share Posted October 15, 2006 In a message dated 10/14/2006 1:01:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes: I find interviews are definately worth watching, and if you do watch, you will quickly see that if that specific interview is quoted at any length in news papers or news clips, it is only the quotable quotes that are used. Sometimes these quotes do not reflect what the person actually said. Thus I like to hear the whole interview if I can.TomAdministrator This is very true. Only certain soundbites are used and often these are taken out of context to suit the presenter's agenda. This is actually quite common and is a very underhanded tactic. Also, actually watching the interview is a good way to add the verbal and body language queues on both sides of the interview. This can be very revealing as well, and is good practice for us when it comes to interpreting body language. As mentioned earlier, video and photos can be easily doctored these day. What with Photoshop and all else, it is hard to trust pictures these days. I still believe that unaltered pictures don't lie in as such as they record what is before them. However, scenes can be manipulated, pictures altered, etc., so the honest picture can be used as part of a larger deception. During the Israeli/Lebannon conflict, at least one reporter was caught altering photos to make battle damage look worse. News crews in the US and elsewhere show tight shots of protesters making their numbers look larger, but a wide angle shot will show only a few people present, and so on. Text can be made to lie too of course. However, what I was getting at when I started this thread was that many news stories in particular, even those about science matters, have video components. About things like that, I would rather read the text version of the story than listen to a presenter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2006 Report Share Posted October 15, 2006 In a message dated 10/15/2006 3:28:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, lemnosforge@... writes: I don't think you mean reading about a news story in the newspaper vs. watching a clip on the evening television about it? Perhaps you mean those news sites where there is a text but also a "talking head" on the computer screen, typically an animated-type female character who is reading the text? (I've noticed that it seems that for some reason the British news sites tend to have that a lot more often than the USA sites?) Yes, I mean the clips on websites. I've never watched the animated ones you mention, though. What I mean is that if you browse some of the news sites, they will have stories posted, but those stories will be video clips from their programming rather than a written version or transcript, though they often will post a transcript eventually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2006 Report Share Posted October 15, 2006 I don't think you mean reading about a news story in the newspaper vs. watching a clip on the evening television about it? Perhaps you mean those news sites where there is a text but also a "talking head" on the computer screen, typically an animated-type female character who is reading the text? (I've noticed that it seems that for some reason the British news sites tend to have that a lot more often than the USA sites?) In either case, up until age 45 when my eyes first started to go really bad I always preferred text. Then for a few years I figured I probably would have to give up reading- That was really kind of traumatizing because throughout my life there have been many many days where I read for 6 to 10 hours a day- Probably a major contributing factor to my extreme near-sightedness. Anyway- Then I got bifocals/reading glasses and suddenly reading was again easy. But now I'm 51 and still reading or reading on the net some 6 to 10 hours at least a few days every week. Now my eyes are slightly on the bad side of being correctible by ordinary lenses and even reading is becoming difficult again. So when I can take a break from text and rest my eyes by watching a talking head, I usually do. But they do indeed go very slow, and that can be very frustrating at times. If I had my druthers, I'd have good eyes. Heph VISIGOTH@... wrote: In a message dated 10/14/2006 1:01:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes: I find interviews are definately worth watching, and if you do watch, you will quickly see that if that specific interview is quoted at any length in news papers or news clips, it is only the quotable quotes that are used. Sometimes these quotes do not reflect what the person actually said. Thus I like to hear the whole interview if I can.TomAdministrator This is very true. Only certain soundbites are used and often these are taken out of context to suit the presenter's agenda. This is actually quite common and is a very underhanded tactic. Also, actually watching the interview is a good way to add the verbal and body language queues on both sides of the interview. This can be very revealing as well, and is good practice for us when it comes to interpreting body language. As mentioned earlier, video and photos can be easily doctored these day. What with Photoshop and all else, it is hard to trust pictures these days. I still believe that unaltered pictures don't lie in as such as they record what is before them. However, scenes can be manipulated, pictures altered, etc., so the honest picture can be used as part of a larger deception. During the Israeli/Lebannon conflict, at least one reporter was caught altering photos to make battle damage look worse. News crews in the US and elsewhere show tight shots of protesters making their numbers look larger, but a wide angle shot will show only a few people present, and so on. Text can be made to lie too of course. However, what I was getting at when I started this thread was that many news stories in particular, even those about science matters, have video components. About things like that, I would rather read the text version of the story than listen to a presenter. Hephaestus Clubfoothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestushttp://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hephaestus.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabeiroi Get your email and more, right on the new .com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.