When, How to Tell Stories with Text, Multimedia
By Jeff Glick
Deputy Managing Editor, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

(Este artículo está disponible en español)

Is a multimedia approach to online storytelling better then a text-based approach? You'll find no easy answers in the latest Eyetrack III research released by The Poynter Institute, Estlow Center for Journalism & New Media, and Eyetools.

You will find the study offers insight into how to consider and approach multimedia storytelling presentations.

Here is what I take away from the latest research:

• Navigation will make or break your presentation.
• Not every story will benefit from multimedia.
• Presentations that showcase real people and real things will always do better with users than those that don't.
• Anticipate users' needs based on the content presented.
• Interactivity can add to the user experience.

The research validates a lot of the successes and mistakes we've made along the way at the South Florida Sun-Sentinel in our attempts to tell stories online.

One of our first mistakes was making navigation too complicated (Haiti: The Eroding Nation). The Eyetrack observations clearly indicate that users do rely heavily on text and clear queues on where to click.

Navigation should be simple, easy to use, and obvious (Marine Attractions: Below the Surface). Leveraging sound to draw attention or define navigation actions may be helpful. Although there's no current research to back it up, our philosophy is to not reinvent the wheel on every project.

We believe that over time users will become familiar with the navigation, making it easier for them to focus on the story, not the technology. Future studies may want to look at whether users benefit from repeated exposure to a standard multimedia interface, and whether comprehension increases as the user becomes comfortable with the style.

Consider the User

Because most of us have limited resources and limited time to produce print, online, and on-air graphic presentations, we have to choose our projects wisely. Not every story should employ multimedia. The study shows that in many cases text may be the more effective approach. As journalists and storytellers we've got to know how and why users will benefit from multimedia before we attempt to produce it. What will the user take away from the experience?

As a rule of thumb, subjects that would be treated visually in a newspaper are great starting points for multimedia presentations. The same graphics and photos that explain unfamiliar concepts or show what can't normally be seen can be turned into powerful multimedia.

In our shop, we try very hard to choose subjects, scenarios, or events that don't illustrate the obvious (Voting Booth Simulator). If it's obvious, a non-multimedia text presentation is probably the best way to inform. That is probably why Eyetrack's testing of a New York Times graphic that explains what a cupola is (a furnace that melts tons of scrap) scored so well with participants.

Another consideration should be the human factor. As seen in Eyetrack's heatmap results, people look at people. The human form is a powerful visual image. Some of the projects (electoral tracker) my staff perceives to be great work were not as lauded as were the image and audio-oriented projects (AIDS in the Caribbean) that focused on people.

Many websites utilize daily picture galleries to attract and inform their users. We do on our site, and it has become one of our most viewed features.

When our team decides on a multimedia approach, we always ask: what tools (audio, video, text, sound effects, animation, and interactivity) do we employ and how do we integrate them into a cohesive story presentation?

Eyetrack shows that when quizzed, those that viewed the multimedia version of the "Dangerous Business" story had a lower retention rate than those that read it as text. But it also makes the observation that "multiple streams of conflicting information" such as an animated photo, text, and audio, may be too much for a user to take in all at once. This is particularly true if the user isn't given any control of how to view the story.

In a standard printed or online text presentation, a reader can stop, pause, or reread any word, line, or paragraph until it's understood. And they're never forced to pay attention to multiple items at once. Multimedia should be no different in that it should give the user control of the pace.

The reader is experiencing the story and should have the ability to stop, pause, and replay an animation, text, or audio. That is why it is so important for us as creators of these presentations to understand the tools and know how and when to employ them.

Good Design Is Universal

Multimedia should be an experience, not a download. Besides navigation, the look and feel contributes to user expectation. Sites such as the New York Times, El Mundo, and MSNBC.com do a great job creating a cohesive presentation style that bends, shifts, and morphs to accommodate all kinds of content.

In print design we talk about concepts such as hierarchy, contrast, and flow. These concepts are universal and can and should be applied to multimedia. Many of our online presentations pace users through a project (Spiegel Grove), often playing an animation with audio to completion before the text appears. And when text is on the screen, the project waits for the user to signal that he or she is ready to proceed.

The use of color, position of elements, and the timing of the content stream are critical in directing users through a presentation. Creating options for linear or non-linear viewing allows users to view things the way they want.

There are times when a presentation and the interactivity it provides for the user can override the need for options. One such example is a simulator we built to give users a fun and educational idea of what it might have been like to operate the Civil War era submarine H.L. Hunley. In this project, the user is able to actually pilot the sub on a mission, and although we don't have any data on information retention rates, the sheer number of positive comments we received legitimized the approach in our eyes.

Looking Ahead

This study validates some successful practices, such as:

• Repurposing content is good. Web purists don't want to hear it, but most newsrooms put out an enormous amount of great content, much of which never gets used or used in a way that has impact and helps to better tell a story. In print, we may publish several photos with the story. Online, we can publish photos enhanced with audio captioning or narration that can stand alone. On-air, we may run a two-minute linear video package. Online, we can provide more detailed video packages that can be viewed in a non-linear way. In print, we can illustrate complex subject matter. Online, we can animate it and actually show it.
• Give users choices. Multimedia and text presentations can and should coexist. We now package the complete stories within our multimedia presentations at the Sun-Sentinel.
• Don't create in a vacuum. Integrate the multimedia workflow into the normal story planning process of your newsroom.
• Team tackle. Most newsrooms don't have large interactive resources. So develop very close relationships between online, on-air, and print newsrooms.
• The Eyetrack III study just begins to scratch the surface of multimedia storytelling potential and what we must consider as we continually evolve the medium.

[ ADD A COMMENT/READ COMMENTS ON EYETRACK MULTIMEDIA RESULTS HERE ]