http://longform.org/
Is long-form journalism a lost art? how many people sit down and read articles that run more than 1000 words? I personally have trouble with it. Even if I start reading a great article, I will rarely finish it if the word count runs over 1500. I get bored. I want to move on to the next thing. Has instantaneous news, sound bytes and the 24 hour news cycle contributed to our news ADD?
I have tried to read the following article about Mitt Romney and his stance on abortion, but I can't get through it. I challenge someone to read the whole thing...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_conversion/2012/02/mitt_romney_s_abortion_record_flip_flop_or_conversion_.single.html#pagebreak_anchor_2
I honestly do think that long-format PRINT journalism is going to disappear soon. I personally saw the Romney article and didn't even try to read it through. With so many distractions online, it is near impossible to make a viewer concentrate a considerable period of time for reading a long article.
ReplyDeleteThis is sad indeed because some stories cannot be explained without the necessary context that one gets from a long print article. Our new challenge as journalists is to be accurate and provide enough context through short, precise and entertaining writing.
Wow, I sincerely hope long-form journalism is not dead! I've wanted to write for a magazine since I started hoarding my Highlights (remember those??) when I was about 9 years old. I still do that, because I really enjoy the unique reading experience only a magazine can provide, and I always want to be able to go back and re-read if I'm so inclined. I like to think other people enjoy that, as well.
ReplyDeleteMost people do recognize that long-form journalism is different from reporting breaking news or covering a beat. We in journalism certainly realize it, especially as we face increasing challenges with adapting to the Internet, fulfilling the expectations of a 24-7 news audience and and competing with so many more people who act as journalists (bloggers, etc...duh). Covering the daily news has become much different — people who I wouldn't think are that up-to-date on current events post articles on Facebook and start conversations about it. The difference though, is that anyone can do that. You see bloggers and everyday citizens "reporting" about daily occurrences via Twitter and other social media — but they don't go in-depth. They have a word limit, a time limit. There may be more people participating in journalism, but do you see more people doing long-form journalism? No way, because not everyone can. Whenever people ask me what kind of journalism I want to do after graduation, or if I'm nervous about my "dying" profession," I tell them I want to do a sort of journalism that's still special, that's not going anywhere. To be that sort of journalist, you still need all the skills we learn as journalism majors. The stuff that's less important is the stuff anyone can harness — the immediacy of the Internet, the broad audiences of social media. But with long-form, it still takes talent to report a story in that much detail. You still need to be in a position where your job entails spending full-time hours on the same story, for months. You still need to know the ethics and law of the profession (more so than for day-to-day beat coverage). You still need phenomenal interview skills, an incredible eye for detail and an analytical mind that allows you to notice patterns and make connections. To me, that's where our profession is going because that's what sets us apart from people who can post 140 characters in 5 minutes but would never spend months investigating the same topic. The people who can do that will be the people we actually call the "journalists" of the future.
As for whether there's still an audience for it, I think there always will be because people will always be intensely interested in a few specific topics. Maybe the article on abortion didn't hold your attention because that's not your favorite subject, because it wasn't written well enough or — more likely — because you read it online. Like Andy wrote above, the Internet has far too many distractions for many people to stay on the same page or same story for too long. That's why long-form PRINT journalism is still special, particularly in niche magazines. Maybe someone in the healthcare field would have read the entire article if it was printed in a specialty magazine for that field, and if they could sit down comfortably and read it, or mark their spot and return later. I like the idea of leaving a magazine open on the coffee table and reading long stories while I'm lounging on the couch, whether I finish it in the same sitting or not.
Speaking of long-form, sorry for leaving a novel as a comment. :)
I think it really depends on the topic. I will sit and read a long-form journalism article if it is on a subject I enjoy but also have problems reading something that doesn't attract my interest. I love reading features in Rolling Stone magazine and I have a book at home entirely devoted to long sports articles written for The New Yorker over the years.
ReplyDeleteWhy I may still enjoy them, I believe in the day of the Internet and "instant news," I find that the attention span for many is becoming shorter and shorter and thus, I believe this is an absolute relevant discussion. But like my first point, as long as there is an audience, there will be long-form journalism. However, now that other forms of entertainment are starting to dominate, only those interested in the particular topic of the long-form article will most likely be willing to sit down and read the whole piece. In that lies the problem.
As someone who is doing their site analysis posts on the ultimate (at least in my opinion) example of long-form journalism, The New Yorker, I understand your difficulty reading long articles. Reading an issue of The New Yorker from cover to cover usually takes me three hours, and I rarely have that amount of time in one block to just read. Even when I do, I find my attention straying from time to time. Using the internet (usually with five or so tabs up at a time) and flicking through my CNN app on my phone means I've mastered the art of skimming headlines and leads before moving onto the next article.
ReplyDeleteBut that's not to say I don't enjoy long-form journalism. Long articles have the capacity to really delve into something thoroughly, and the result is a really comprehensive understanding of the topic. During the week I find myself carrying around a few copies and folding down the corners when I run out of time and then resuming when I have another few minutes; it results in absolutely tattered magazines within a few days. As Jordan noted above, it also depends on the topic of the article. I enjoyed that article on Mitt Romney (I find him interesting) but truthfully, I took three breaks to check Twitter and CNN on my phone while reading.