Assignment One

Part One:
Human Transfer of Deadly Bird Flu:
The podcast of the news story was difficult to listen to. The man speaking had a British accent, and that was all I could think about for the first two spoken sentences. I would imagine that the quality of voice being used for a podcast is directly related to the audience understanding of information being presented. I also got visually distracted by other things while listening; I ended up staring at the 24" by 36" poster of Zac Efron on my roommates wall. There is also no visual stimulation to draw the audience in; this causes the audience's eyes to wander and focus on other things. Some benefits of using a podcast for means of transferring news information is that there are no visual distractions being presented to the audience; people can better focus on the information rather than the camera angles, ugly outfits, or bad nose jobs shown on the screen. The lack of visuals is also a benefit to the news company because money is not having to be spent going toward cameramen, wardrobe specialists, or bad nose jobs.
The video I found took a few minutes to load, and once the video did start playing it jumped and paused about every five seconds. Online videos contain more content than online podcasts or articles; some people might have trouble viewing such videos because of computer/internet problems. Another con to using an online video for news broadcast is that they don't remain on the internet as long as articles or other resources; at least, I found this to be true in my own personal experiences. There are not very many videos about bird flu left on YouTube anymore because they have been replaced with "new" news and other more interesting videos. A benefit of an online video is that they are interesting to watch. I enjoyed watching the shots of dead birds and infected hospitalized patients. The video made me feel like I was there experiencing the effects of the virus. Also, the visual shots made me trust what was being told to me; anyone can exaggerate the truth with words but a visual image can't really lie.
One of the cons of reading an article online is that many people simply do not care to read. Also, many people do not have the best reading comprehension skills, therefore the information may not be absorbed as well as the information in a visually stimulating video or photograph. Also, an article is not as enticing as a video; I, personally, would rather watch something than read it. However, the online article about bird flu contained more information than either the video or the podcast. The top of the article contained bullet points for the four top experts in the medical bird flu area; there were also mini biographies of each expert and a link to find more information on them. I would imagine that an article posted online would contain much more information than an article printed within a newspaper or magazine because of the limited space permitted in print. There were also many links for more information regarding the bird flu on the bottom of the page; this helps readers find the information they are looking for without blindly searching on the internet. Another benefit of an online article is that I, as the reader, could see the words being presented; I could see that they were talking about the influenza H5N1 virus. If I didn't know what influenza was, I could look it up and refer back to the article for spelling and such. When news is only being said out loud, the audience tends to forget the information. Also, audible information is being said so quickly that there is not time for listeners to write things down on paper for future referencing. If information is being written, I can read at my own pace and absorb the information that I choose to.

Part Two:
"Riding in Convoy to Southern Lebanon" was interesting because there were film clips of the area and real scenes of what was occurring while they were there. Even the greatest writer can describe the area with words, but written description will never compare to an actual video clip of the area. Another cool part was the map they provided with the path charted out to visually represent what part of the county they were in at the time. The map was labeled and I could look up areas close to the region and discover more on my own if I chose to. One of the weaknesses about this story was the fact that there was not very much news being reported; I did not know why they were there or what they were studying in the area. I wish they would have given some background to make the video clips significant. Also, the story was not very enticing to the masses; I would be lead to that story on my own because I can't really relate to the story. I honestly didn't even know what was significant about Lebanon before I watched the stories. "Your Guide to the Tut" was very fun to experience because of all the visual stimulation and the interactiveness of it. I liked being able to see the floorplan of the Chicago museum and "discover" it on my own. I was in control of which area to look at, I liked being in control and it made me pay attention. The exhibit was very organized and easy to navigate. The simulation at the beginning was cool because it showed different angles of the museum and what it would be like to actually walk in. I also really liked the pictures and time lines they presented with the information. However, I know that the experience had to be far less exciting than the actual exhibit in the museum in Chicago. I wish the online experience had sound bytes with it or more written information. I didn't really know why the information was significant to my life or the world in general. An application to the real world today would have connected the story in with the audience. "Iraqi Kurdistan:The other Iraq" was the most interesting of all for me. I am always curious what life in Iraq is really like. The video focused on the Kurds, which I have also wanted to know about for a long time. The video transitioned from slides with word explanations to pictures or videos of the description. I liked reading about it and then seeing it. This appealed to people who learn through text and through visual stimulation. However, this video took twenty minutes for me to watch because it took so long to load. I wouldn't have sat through watching it unless I were assigned to for this class.