Articles themselves are condensed to narrow columns of text across 5, 6, 7 pages, and ads that are really distracting for the reader, so it's not a pleasant experience to 'curl up' with a good website.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I like getting 'Times' articles online. But the actual paper just has too many words.
I had been reading magazines a lot, and I love magazines, and so I was always asking myself why is it that these gorgeous articles just don't translate well to the web? Presentation was one aspect of it.
Journalism is being pushed into a space where I don't think it should ever go, where it's trying to support the monetization model of the Web by driving page views. So what you have is a drop-off of long-form journalism, because long-form pieces are harder to monetize.
Nearly all web publications are driven by the display model, which is in turn driven by page views. But we all know the web is shifting, thanks to mobile devices and the walled gardens they erect. The new landscape of the web is far more complicated, and new products must emerge.
Headlines are so great in a sense that they can take a little bit from an article completely out of context and blow it into something it's not. Some people really only read headlines.
The web has introduced a competitive, and some might argue hostile, landscape for long, in-depth, resource-intensive journalism.
I, perhaps wrongly, assume that people actually read articles that interest them rather than just headlines.
There is no need for advertisements to look like advertisements. If you make them look like editorial pages, you will attract about 50 per cent more readers.
I read a lot of news online, but I like buying a paper because I'll read an article I wouldn't normally read. And more often than not, the articles that you don't expect to care about are the ones that grab you.
Anyone can make an article longer; the skill is keeping it tight and lean.