I am going to preface this post by saying that I do know blogging is quite subjective and, along with the field of basic journalism, there are no concrete rules. I do, however, believe if someone is going to post their beliefs or general thoughts on the Internet that these posts should be somewhat journalistically correct and follow some form of a guideline.
I was excited to find that ajc.com offers numerous blogs in several different areas of interest. However, I was a little disappointed when I began to read them. Maybe it is that I expect blogs to read as editorial pieces, but even bloggers should make a conscious effort to follow some form of a guideline.
One blog in particular that caught my eye is the American Idol Buzz, specifically the April 1 post. I have always been an avid watcher of the show and it is not until this season that I have missed a few episodes. Having said that, I am not as familiar with the contestants as I have been in past years. The blog, written by Rodney Ho, recaps on what occurred in the most recent episode and gives his personal insight about contestants and the overall show.
In his most recent post, April 1, Rodney talks about Megan Joy Corkrey who has just been sent home. His headline of "American Idol Recap, top 9 results: Megan Joy Corkrey flies the coop" is creative and eye catching. I also like the fact that he includes some interactivity by providing a poll. Like Joe said in lecture, this is a nice design tactic when working online.
Overall I think the blog is too opinionated and confusing. I think back to when I was working on my piece in lab and in some areas of my story I did not allow my audience to have their own opinion because I provided one for them. In graph five specifically is where I think some editing could work in Rodney's favor. He could cut out the word "enjoyed" and the sentence would still work, but leave the reader to have an opinion. The last graph also needs improving. He should eliminate the word "prefer" and just compare the two songs in terms of how they did on the charts.
I know this blog is probably for people who watch American Idol, but it should also cater to those who would like information on the show who do not necessarily know everything about it. The blogger doesn't really clarify who is who and jumps around a lot. Graph five referring to the behind the scenes is especially confusing and I watched the episode. It is too much of a play-by-play and the detail just makes it unclear. He should have said something like "The behind the scenes was very lighthearted and heavily edited, but we did find the idols are really getting along. We learn Scott MacIntyre loves chocolate cake and that several of the other contestants enjoy imitating each other, but all on good terms." Graph six also needs to be improved for clarification. This graph is explaining the elimination process, but nobody knows that because it isn't clearly stated. Rodney needs to properly introduce the paragraph with a sentence like "Preparing for elimination, the contestants are placed in sets of three." I also believe that graph four stating "The theme next week: songs from the year they were born. I will evaluate those tomorrow or Monday" should be placed at the very end of the post, serving as the concluding paragraph. It is random in the middle.
In his series of posts, Rodney Ho does not include any pictures. A picture included in his post would definitely work in his favor. A picture of Megan Corky in his recent post would help identify the contestant, as well as give readers a visual component.
Lauren,
ReplyDeleteThis post is an example of what a small world the journalism profession is. I worked briefly with Rodney Ho in the Virginia Beach bureau of The Virginian-Pilot in the early '90s.
I'm glad that you acknowledge that in some blogs it's perfectly appropriate to be subjective. In judging the content of a given blog post, you want to use criteria very similar to how you would judge any other writing: First, you have to establish the purpose of the post, and then you have to determine how closely, in form and content, the post lived up to its purpose.
The post you refer to is essentially a review of an artistic performance, an episode of "American Idol." Reviews by their nature are highly subjective and would be pointless without the author's opinion. Whether he enjoyed the performance, in this type of writing, is relevant.
I think you make a good argument about clarity in parts of the post. Not having seen the show myself, I had to work a little to figure out some of the scenes he was describing. This is an example of how "what's taken for granted cannot be improved"; it would have been useful for Rodney or an editor to step back and think about what was taken for granted in the post's description of the show.