These changes in the dynamics of writing
New media forces us to rethink old theories.
20 Matching Annotations
- Last 7 days
-
openurl.ebsco.com openurl.ebsco.com
-
-
Seen in this way, electronic media not only democratize publication and content creation ([45]; [59]; [101]) but also make it possible for writers to speak with, ask questions of, and be influenced by an audience of readers.
Anyone can write, publish, and get feedback.
-
With the advent of the Internet's wide availability,
Shift: audience is now real and responsive.
-
The static nature of printed texts—writers writing alone and readers reading alone—has long been an accepted constraint on a writer's craft. Until recently, the vast majority of writing was published and made available to readers in some form of print publication.
Print limits real-time interaction.
-
In this research tradition, a writer's audience has primarily been understood as a construction of the writer's imagination or a refraction of the writer's understandings.
Classic idea: audience = mental construct.
-
this article aims to reopen a conversation
Purpose of the article.
-
But, in this realm of increasingly pervasive written communication, to whom do we write?
Returns to the central problem of identifying audience.
-
much social communication has moved online
Online writing changes audience dynamics.
-
Writing has become central in the workplace, in education, and to our personal lives
Emphasizing writing’s importance today.
-
I then show how understandings of audience can be linked to those of motivation and interest—and how this combination may bridge a traditional divide between research traditions.
Key claim: audience affects writing motivation.
-
How does this decision affect writers' cognition about writing? Their motivation to write?
Shows the article links audience to thinking and motivation.
-
When writers write, how do they decide to whom they are speaking?
Asking the core question about audience.
-
-
search.credoreference.com search.credoreference.com
-
regardless of how much thought and attention is given to the audience, and how much data are collected from the audience, news audiences themselves can never be truly known.
The author ends by reminding us that journalists will always have to rely on assumptions because audiences are too big and too complex to understand.
-
As economist Markus Prior found, the increasing variety of media options in a digital media environment means people now find themselves faced with a seemingly infinite number of alternatives to news
This helps explain why so many people avoid the news, there are easier, more entertaining choices everywhere.
-
First, research has shown that audiences tend to stick to their media habits, even when the media environment undergoes significant changes, and these habits are predisposed toward popular content.
This explains why people keep going back to the same news sources even when there are tons of options.
-
What these measures cannot do, however, is reveal audiences’ underlying motivations. These measures reveal what audiences do, but not why.
Data can track clicks and views, but it can’t explain motivations.
-
Journalists have also traditionally perceived audiences as passive recipients of the news, rather than as active participants in the news
This highlights how journalists underestimate readers and don’t expect them to participate.
-
journalists have traditionally written their stories for white, middle-class citizens.
This reveals the bias built into newsrooms and why many communities feel misrepresented.
-
audiences became an abstraction.
The author is saying journalists can’t actually see their audience anymore, so they have to guess who they’re writing for.
-
Journalists, like all media producers, depend on their audiences for both societal relevance and economic stability.
This shows that journalism cannot function without people paying attention.
-