Format is one of the most important aspects in getting information to a large number of people online (as is the intention of so many online journalism websites) and is the focus of today's post. This post will be analyzing the websites of the New York Times, National Public Radio (NPR), and National Review to see how they format their information differently.
To start off with the similarities first, all of the included websites are politics heavy with headings of different topics on the top of the website ranging from politics to pop culture references. In addition to the different subjects all websites have, they also present that information through different mediums including articles and videos. That being said, NPR and National Review do a better job at including different mediums on the homepage, such as podcasts and different videos and NPR with its radio, compared to the New York Times. And that brings us to the other differences.
While the majority of the articles are shown with tags, the layouts are different. For example, NPR and National Review label each article with general tags such as “World” and “Politics”. Meanwhile, the New York Times labels their articles based on their purpose, such as “Analysis”, and if they do mention a certain subject it is narrowed down such as “Trump Administration”. As mentioned beforehand, the New York Times uses mainly articles to present information on its homepage rather than add other mediums, but it still holds the greatest number of topics. It even includes a small infographic for the weather. The games it adds in the page also seek to increase engagement with the reader, which is something other websites may benefit from. The New York Times also has a large number of articles in the sidebar. These additional articles are important to get the reader more information they may be interested in. Although National Review’s homepage is shorter than that of NPR, it contains more links and articles, as well as its social media information which again, increases engagement.
The articles themselves also have different features. NPR’s articles, like the homepage, have a lot of links leading to other helpful articles that give more consent to the article as a whole. Index words at the end of the article help summarize to the reader what the article is mainly about. New York Times’ articles do not have as many links, but they do give the option of listening to the article rather than reading it, and that is, in my opinion, considerate of many people’s needs and preferences. Finally, National Review also had links leading to original statements that give more context. The website also gave readers the ability to rate the article and to comment, and that in turn creates a stronger community.
All in all, the websites had different formats, but they also had features that made them stand out. It would be helpful if all can fill in bits and pieces of resources they are missing. That would make the website a better place to obtain information overall.
Add comment
Comments