TWEET

I just told my sister I created a twitter account and don't know how to use it.

She said "I have no idea how to even get there".

I said, "Twitter.com"

She said, "It's like facebook on drugs."

i tweet

I created a twitter account.
My username is bcihaveto.
That is as creative as I get.
Who wants to follow me?!

Aesthetics

Do people visit a site specifically for the content and overlook the design? No, it goes hand in hand. When looking at most political sites, I found them to be crowed and messy, therefore creating annoyance and confusion. Most of these site were also only generated towards an older population, probably male. So the question became, how does a site generate more viewers and target a larger number of people? Visual appeal could possibly be the answer.

Color consistency is great and makes the homepage look polished, check out The Texas Tribune and notice their use of recurring colors. Orange and black litter the page yet tie everything together. The homepage is clean and sparse, yet with enough links to send readers to the right places. It is not overwhelming like Politico where it seems that the scroll bar goes on forever. Instead of trying to squeeze as many headlines and short blurbs on a page, it would look better and ultimately become more useful if the site was broken into sections. For example, a section of stories that were most viewed, a section about local news, world news, breaking stories...something that brings more order to the chaos.

Perez Hilton, celebrity blogger and extreme harasser, has a great banner when you enter his page. It is definitely an attention grabber. This could be useful on our page because you know right away what site you are looking at. Especially if you type keywords into Google and click on the links it offers without noticing which exact site you are going to. It makes its presence known.

PICTURES! The Texas Tribune always has a stunning picture. It is usually raw and inspiring. Videos are also an interactive way to spread news and serves as an alternate way of getting the facts. I think only a few pictures, if not less than three, should be allowed on the homepage. There isn't a need to slam as much information and visuals in such a small space. Some carefully chosen pictures or video could be used as a teaser to get readers to continue exploring the site.

Consistency is a must. Catchy headlines make people click on stories regardless of what the actual content is. Humor draws in people of all ages, and those of the younger generation can relate and appreciate it.

NFL has a post game day discussion. I am drawn to this site every day for their quick quips about game day behavior and commentary.The headlines stay the same no matter what team is discussed. It was over when...Noteworthy...What we learned...There are two links on top of the page, Quick Take or Full Story. I like this feature a lot. It gives me an option but also a taste of what the full story will be like. I also read the quick take for a few minutes in the morning and then go back to the full story when I have time. This is a good feature. If the reader likes a few sentences of what they read, they will come back for more. This will get them back on the page when they have time and cause them to explore the site in more depth.

Now, how about something different? We talked about interactive polls or a daily comic. Both are good ideas. This will be something consistent that causes the reader to look for it daily and either participate or not. Just the act of having it there daily is a good idea. Our group also brainstormed ideas for having a personal story written by a reader. Looking, once more, at The Texas Tribune, you'll notice a section above the header of three different stories. We could place this idea here. Also, a daily fact, something titled, "Did you know?" It could be a random fact about a political figure, history of a state, America in general, something short and interesting that only takes a few seconds to read. Maybe even trivia.

Yahoo! has a picture roll that I find very catchy. It takes up a small space somewhere on the homepage with a picture and a short caption. If you roll your mouse over each picture it enlarges with a link to click on the full story. There can be 15 pictures in that small space with stories. This is a good idea to condense a lot of information in an easy to view manner.

These are all ideas to boost viewers. If a site is easy to navigate and understand then readers will come back.

for travelers? or locals?

This guy brings up some good points. When I think about my own town, all five of us, I think, who cares? In a town where there is no gas station, street lights, and only two main roads, I can't help but wonder what there is to talk about. Maybe a gossip blog would satisfy the local tongue wagers and news of a tag sale would build excitement with the elderly, but then I read this and now I get it. Hyper local blogging could become a business. He says, "If you’re a real estate agent, write about real estate and where you practice it. A blogging plumber? Write about plumbing and where you practice it. Bike store owner? Write about bikes and biking and where you bike locally."

Then I got to thinking, what if I was planning to move into a new town with my husband and children, and despite the overall appearance and facade of the town I wanted to know the ins and outs. I'd want to know what the school system was like from real parents who wrote about it freely and anonymously, weekend activities, school sports, etc. Maybe this type of blogging could become sort like a Consumer Reports magazine on the local front. It could even become a way of socially connecting...meeting new friends, being more involved and aware of the town you live in...

HOWEVER, would I read it for the meaningless, day to day, shut up about it already, kind of news? I'll pass. Maybe if my town was bigger and actually had some life to it.

happy election day

I woke up this morning to a phone call from my father. He called to remind me to vote. I said, "for what?" he laughed, said, "really, Allison?" apparently it is brand new information to my father that I haven't been following politics. It's not something that interests me or that I directly care about. I know that I should pay more attention, but for right now I don't. Maybe when I'm older...

intent: not to create new knowledge

After reading various articles concerning Wikipedia, I decided to browse through the website typing in various searches that interested me. I read through articles concerning the Giants, various American authors and some favorite TV shows. I realized, I know nothing of importance. In the about section on Wikipedia, it says "Visitors do not need specialized qualifications to contribute" okay, well I don't, and still can't. I don't even feel like I have anything worthwhile to say or even if I thought something was interesting or could slightly expand on something already written, should I?

So now I wonder, how does Wikipedia even work? If everyone can post and edit whenever they chose, (except Scientologists, that is) how doesn't it become so muddled with useless information? However, since it is such a highly trafficked sight, any wrong information is cleared up seemingly within moments.

But what I don't get is why people spend so much time updating and adding to entries. It's almost like writing a research paper, for fun, in your spare time. I'll pass.

As far as Wikipedia being a reliable source, I would say it is. Although I never cite Wikipedia as a primary source, I do do my preliminary research on the site. I find it to be written in layman's terms and it gets right to the point. I would rather read short article and feel mildly informed than do tons of research and get the same out of it. Maybe I'm just lazy,

dear diary

After reading this article, I began to wonder what the future will look like if the continued rise of the dotted line actually does represent EVERYONE. Will we all update our status hourly and claim ourselves to be publish authors? In the literal sense, I guess we are. We write and post, making our thoughts, whether large or small, public knowledge. Will we one day receive an e-mail, a comment on our blog post, or a tweet saying we won the Nobel Prize for literature? Or a Newbery Medal? Will Oprah be texting to ask us to be in her book club?

In a way, the ability we all have to share our thoughts and information with the world is amazing. However, is the accessibility and easiness of doing so, making us stupider? If we find posting our breakfast choice next to articles about world events just as important and common, what does that say about us as intellects? Where will it end?