It's getting harder to rip on Slate when they actually put stuff together that's pretty enjoyable. Lately they've had a new feature called "Slate V," in which the website illustrates select written pieces in video form. You wouldn't think that a difference in medium would produce much of an alteration in tone, but if you ask me, the video versions of the articles manage to come off better than their written counterparts. Pieces that seem excessively speculative or overly judgemental as articles come off mellow and grounded as videos. Much of the credit should go to the site's production department, since the humor in the videos usually comes from the well-chosen deployment of graphics or sound effects.
I particularly liked their video for "Awkward Campaign Questions." Compare it to the written piece. Sure, the written piece isn't bad, but it's hard to tell just how seriously the author is taking himself in the written form. The video lets you know that he's having a good time.
Apparently Slate co-sponsored a Democratic presidential debate with Yahoo! and the Huffington Post, which just goes to show you that these silly little internet sites are really hitting the big time. I haven't seen the Republican candidates attempt as much interaction with the internet crowd, although perhaps they don't feel their target audience resides there. Or maybe the Democrats are just making an insincere gesture in the hopes of appearing hip.
Much has been made of moveon.org's influence in the 2006 elections. I assume the democratic strategists took notice.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of MoveOn, do they really have to use titles like "General Petraeus or General Betray Us" for their articles and ads? I know they are just trying to coopt the style of FoxNews et al, but it just sounds like a cheap slogan from a protest sign--not the sort of image that liberalism benefits from.
[i]...but it just sounds like a cheap slogan from a protest sign--not the sort of image that liberalism benefits from.[/i]
ReplyDeleteAmen?
hrm?
ReplyDelete