Leslie Hutchinson - Cheshire Patch

How does she determine what is newsworthy?

How does she rely on social media? The article she quoted says that watching the debates without social media is unthinkable, that you might as well not watch it. Do you agree?

How does she write differently with different technology or in different media?

 Some of the first few words from Leslie Hutchinson regarded how to tell if something is "newsworthy." She explained how if the writing is filled with adjectives before nouns, it is very likely that the piece is opinionated and may not be entirely true. She also explained that rather than going to people of great authority for inside scoops, find people who are in touch every day. Hutchinson used the example that rather than going to a Superintendent of a school district for updates on school systems and regulations, she would go to a more involved member such as the principal. 

I found it interesting that Leslie relies on social media such as Twitter and Facebook for stories.  She explained that social media clearly shows just how hot the topic is. For example, she told us that last night's presidential debate was the most tweeted event in US history, and even resulted in four new twitter accounts for "Big Bird", one of which already obtained nearly 5,000 followers. Although she made a very valid point of how the social media gives forth information on significant events, I still believe that watching the debates without social media is reasonable. Plenty of newsworthy information can be obtained from 90 minutes of two candidates debating on various issues.

Leslie Hutchinson informed us that only 20% of people will read something from a newspaper or cite that is over 600 words. Therefore, the best way to write articles is to keep them short and concise; the best amount is roughly 150 to 300 words. She also uses SEO - Search Engine Optimization - to make Cheshire Patch pop up with all searches which begin with "Cheshire."Also, she told us that the best time of day to post something you want viewed is on Saturdays at noon, which I thought was interesting. I have never thought about how the time of day can effect the popularity of the website.

I enjoyed the radio version of the story more than the print. It was much more descriptive and very easy to understand. Not only is hearing easier and requires less effort, but it has greater potential to emotionally touch others. Unlike the print version, the radio version contained music and other sound effects which made it more dramatic and entertaining. Also, although there was dialogue in both of the articles, the radio version was entirely dialogue, which in my opinion made it more interesting. The recording of Emily in the radio version made it increasingly more successful in conveying the story than the print article. 
Through hearing, stories can often be more effectively told and described (regarding articles and other shorter pieces). It is much easier to become distracted when reading something than hearing it, even if the words being shared were of the exact same content. Just like music, I find that messages retrieved through your ears will be processed better and most likely be remembered better than those which are written. This of course is very dependent on what exactly you are listening to or reading, and what type of person you are. I personally am very stubborn when it comes to reading, so listening to stories is much more appealing and easier for me. I better understand the story and often make more connections.