While I was perusing the Internet for articles on Netflix, I found this particular article from geek.com: http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-pick/netflix-kills-qwikster-keeps-its-dvds-20111010/.
The author, Sal Cangeloso, had a really striking image on top of the website, which I felt was a great hook as well as ironic image for this article. Cangeloso did adequate resesarch for the story and it was interesting how he decided to leave out the entire Netflix apology letter as well as the new email spelling Qwikster’s demise. It is both a positive and a negative for this article in that by omitting those parts he is asssuming that the reader has kept up-to-date with Netflix and the price and business model changes. However, by omitting this information Cangeloso saves himself from being boring and repetitive to those who (like myself) have avidly followed the Netflix debacle from its inception. The article was very short, which I believe for online articles it need to be. There are so many flashing images and advertisements of celebrity news stories that readers are in order to keep the reader’s attention.
With online content, the reader can soon become distracted by side-bar advertisings or colorful images (I know I have) and the reader will not read any extraneous details unless s/he is really interested in the topic. The image woudl have been more striking if it were in color and the layout design could have changed to include a more interesting and dynamic style. Overall, I think the author did his research into the economic reasons behind Netflix’s changing business model, which was a viewpoint I did not get to see and I don’t think many readers were able to read about due to the saturation of articles focusing on the scandalous changes and unsuccessful name.
Vteche 