<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Journalism stories: A multimedia approach (Part 3)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mindymcadams.com/tojou/2007/journalism-stories-a-multimedia-approach-part-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mindymcadams.com/tojou/2007/journalism-stories-a-multimedia-approach-part-3/</link>
	<description>Notes from the classroom and observations about today's practice of journalism online</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:48:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Melissa Worden</title>
		<link>http://mindymcadams.com/tojou/2007/journalism-stories-a-multimedia-approach-part-3/#comment-666</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Worden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 23:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mindymcadams.com/tojou/2007/journalism-stories-a-multimedia-approach-part-3/#comment-666</guid>
		<description>I love this idea of looking at the newspaper as a 20-minute read and then tailoring the content to fit that. Hm. This reminds me of how I read USA TODAY. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As you stated, TV's time is even shorter. But TV stations get that because local channels (and the evening news shows) have so much to cram into a short period of time. Heck, even the 24-hour cable news channels (and the morning news shows) may be able to devote a little more time, but they still need to be concise when they present the headlines.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But print newspapers don't get it. They're forcing themselves as the primary source, worrying about losing readers to the Internet. If only they would find their niche and give me a paper that I can use differently than how I would consume content on the Web, then they'll keep me as a subscriber. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Convincing editors and publishers of this is the challenge. But hey, that's what makes all this so fun, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love this idea of looking at the newspaper as a 20-minute read and then tailoring the content to fit that. Hm. This reminds me of how I read USA TODAY. </p>
<p>As you stated, TV&#8217;s time is even shorter. But TV stations get that because local channels (and the evening news shows) have so much to cram into a short period of time. Heck, even the 24-hour cable news channels (and the morning news shows) may be able to devote a little more time, but they still need to be concise when they present the headlines.</p>
<p>But print newspapers don&#8217;t get it. They&#8217;re forcing themselves as the primary source, worrying about losing readers to the Internet. If only they would find their niche and give me a paper that I can use differently than how I would consume content on the Web, then they&#8217;ll keep me as a subscriber. </p>
<p>Convincing editors and publishers of this is the challenge. But hey, that&#8217;s what makes all this so fun, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
