Broadcast vs Print

Hurricane Matthew Takes Its Toll on Haiti

Organization: In the broadcast story, they stated the lead twice (giving a simple throwaway lead and then a more in depth lead when they switched reporters). I’d say both the broadcast and the print story gave leads that contained a considerable amount of detail, even if the information covered wasn’t the same. I thought it was interesting that the lead took up around a third of the time in the broadcast story. I believe that the information in the print story stayed pretty pertinent throughout, but as the broadcast story went on, the information continued to get more “dumbed down” as they showed videos of the storm.

Length and content: The two stories are not the same in length and do not provide the same content. The print story I read provided information on how badly relief efforts are needed in Haiti right now and how people are suffering as a result and was fairly long, while the broadcast story gave some general and brief information on the affects of Hurricane Matthew and kept it short.

Sources and quotes: I believe the article used more sources and quotes, while the broadcast tried to keep it brief and just summarize.

Attribution: There was barely any attribution in the broadcast story while the print story seemed to use attribution throughout.

The role of sound and picture: For obvious reasons the use of sound and pictures was definitely more present in the broadcast story. The only time a picture was used in the print story was at the very beginning of the article, and even then the picture was fairly small.

Print Source

Broadcast Source

Comments

  1. Nicely done, Maggie. Thorough.

Speak Your Mind