Apparently the USA Today people thought one major update of the story I've been following throughout the day was enough. Now, this wasn't really breaking news but it was a developing story. Maybe they figured minor updates wouldn't serve them too well as mostly people would read the story once and move on and not check back.
But what about those readers reading after 1:30 p.m., when they last updated the story? There are little things that could have easily been updated, like the statement in the second line about how the Dow Jones was down 200 points at midday. Unless I'm reading that at midday, I want to know how it closed, more importantly.
Another, if minor, update it could have used is to fix where it says at the bottom "Roger Yu, Associated PRess" in the list of contributors. Nit picky I know.
Overall, I think the major update approach served this story well since major news broke Monday, changing the primarily important factors without meriting an entirely new story. Still, I would have liked a few more updates throughout the day to add developments to the story and keep it fresh. I feel like since they last updated the story at 1:30 this afternoon the readers are left with a story that's almost old news by the early evening.
I'll write how I would have begun the story in my next post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Good points ... there was much more they should have included later in the day. But you have to strike a balance... if you change it TOO often, very few people will be able to read any one version. Sort of a tree falling in the forest. Better, unless actually news occurs, to leave the story for more to see.
Post a Comment