It’s been a while since the Internet has become an inevitable thing for us. But, there are still printed media of course and the Internet itself can’t exist without the correct way of writing. In this post, we are going to look at the similarities and the differences in reading style for Web audiences and print media audiences to evaluate each form and make our writing ability better for the digital society.
First of all, we read the Web content and we read the printed media. Although the behavior, “reading,” is same for the both forms, there is a kind of difference between them for certain. According to “WRITING FOR DIGITAL MEDIA ” by Brian Carroll, Web users do not merely read online content but they interact with it because they are not static or one-way unlike printed media. Indeed, when we look something up on the Web, we do not concentrate just on the writing but surf through or to several Web sites in minutes. And it is easy to do that than printed media. However, even though it seems we don’t perceive the role of writing so much, the fact that the writing skill appears on a computer screen is influential on people’s attention. For example, there is a website which contains very informative data and remarkable illustration. But, they are displayed in black and white, all same font, same point, and without any images. Then, people who visit the site could click the back button as soon as they see the screen. Therefore, the layout of the Web page is very important as well as that of printing media. Writers have to make sure not only of the accuracy, clearness, and the skill of writing but also the visibility, readability, and creativity.
It is turned out that we have to be carefulabout the content and the appearance when you create digital writing as well as printed writing. Then, what the digital media make good is the credibility. With the preponderance of Web page publishers and the ease of publishing, source credibility has become bigger issue on the Web than it is in other media. Moreover, co-create sites, such as Wikipedia, are indeed informative and useful, but at the same time it is difficult to assess the credibility. Then, people tend not to use such websites because there are other sites that are reliable. That is, the more users rely on the Internet, the higher their assessments of credibility.
So, should we let non-credible sites go as they like? If not, who monitors and modifies them?