flash

After reading some of the benefits associated with flash journalism according to McAdams, I started to wonder what the eventual limits of interactive journalism will be. McAdams explains that audio slideshows are better than their individual subparts when compiled effectively because a journalist can appeal to two senses simultaneously (sound and sight) rather than just one. As technological development continues to bypass all preconceived expectations, one has to wonder what sense journalists will be able to convey to readers next. Perhaps it won’t be long before our computers have the capability needed to emit scents during an audio slideshow or TV package, finally appealing to a third sense and giving viewers a better feel of the environment and situation that they are witnessing. Sorry for the spacetrip, but that is just one of many points in McAdam’s chapters that jumped out and left me wondering about the future.
Transitioning back to the meat of these chapters, I think that McAdams did an excellent job finally establishing what various sources consider to be “interactive”. My favorite explanation of interactivity comes from Shedroff who defines it as a medium open to feedback, control, creativity, productivity, communication and adaptivity. McAdams also warns that more interactivity is not always necessarily better, and that we as journalists need to make sure that our content comes before our web design. Although I found the history of Flash to be pretty boring in these chapters, McAdam’s overall tips sparked a few thoughts and kept me engaged throughout the entire reading.