News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The New York Times Claws Its Way into the Future by Bahamut on Sunday February 12, 2017 @07:11PM (#13632051)
> Stories still are told almost entirely in text, which was a limitation of the old medium but not the new, and images and video usually are decoration rather than a primary means of story-telling.

I much prefer the largely text medium, even in the digital age. One can consume & process content immensely faster with text than inages and video.

Re:The New York Times Claws Its Way into the Future by hackuser on Sunday February 12, 2017 @07:32PM (#13632140)
> One can consume & process content immensely faster with text than inages and video.

I prefer whatever is more efficient too, and text is great. For example, generally speaking, I prefer text to a video that is longer than maybe 30 seconds, because reading is random access and I can skip to what I want.

But as a universal statement, I'm pretty sure the above comment is factually inaccurate. Certainly for large classes of information, visuals are more efficient. For example, a graph of year-by-year unemployment rates in the 20th century is far more efficient than a list of numbers and years. Similarly, a photo can convey information that would take pages and pages of text.

Re:The New York Times Claws Its Way into the Future by Bahamut on Monday February 13, 2017 @12:37AM (#13633350)
A photo leaves too much interpretation to the user, which takes away from what you want from the news - information.

Graphs are also extremely specific, and very easy for people to misinterpret/get misled by. The specificity of graphs also means that most forms of information cannot be conveyed that way, and so it is a limited tool.