So we were asked to check out a specific article as reference for our introduction into the world of blogging and how we may better approach the subject.
The article in question can be found here
So I have just finished re-reading this article.
I had to read it more than once in order to get a full sense of the information conveyed. Interestingly the first thing I noticed when reading was the format in which it was presented and this point backs up my previous statement.
Mostly when one comes across a piece of text this long and unbroken on the internet you immediately think tl;dr.
There is nothing more frustrating for an internet user than to be faced with a wall of text and seldom will said user read all of the information with any level of detail or clarity unless they are already aware of the subject matter.
I am all too aware of this from my own initial steps into the world of blogs when my peers told me that my writing, though well proportioned and easy to get used to, was too long and thus intimidating.
Morrison touches on this somewhat when she describes content and writing style but not in a way that I found as useful as the practical feedback I have received.
As for the article itself, I was most intrigued by some of the points raised. I was interested in the historical aspect of blogging and the etymology of the word. There were also some interesting points touched on like the idea of anonymity on the internet and users ability to create monikers and pseudonyms for themselves helping them to be shielded from litigation or job loss.
It was a very hard read however and I’m not sure if that could actually be one of the reasons that I found it so worthwhile. We are, after all, discussing the idea of textual transmission and the ability to use technology to communicate ideas. This article and the format in which it presented itself made this very difficult indeed.
So what is it that we need to do in our own blogs to make sure this doesn’t happen? Well for a start I would have broken the article into much smaller paragraphs within the Sub Chapters. I would also have broken up the text wall by inserting the occasional picture or reference.
The actual page layout for this site is also rather difficult to read on. I ended up copy and pasting the article to Word, where I converted it into my preferred font (anyone see Helvetica) and double spacing it; all of which made it much easier to digest.
I’m not sure if there are bigger points to be made with regards the article itself. I was interested in some of the points as discussed above but overall I either knew the information or was uninterested in the points and their repetition. Whether this is due to the format or the content, I am unsure.