A critique of multimedia
I found a piece of multimedia news which immerse me in it.And it’s not long for me.I can get through the whole thing.

This is a report from The Washington Post tracking refugees from Turkish shores to Greek island of Lesbos. It’s a great example of multimedia.Videos,photos,audios and graphics show the entirely real scenes of their struggling life,including the process of boating,accidents,daily routines and a lot.Obviously, the story is more tridimensional and touching for readers,which makes readers put themselves in refugees’ shoes more easily.

I really like the style of storytelling.The storytelling puts great emphasis on interaction.When there are additional information ,a few options will come out for readers to choose and acquire the information they are interested in.Definitely, It’s a effective way for journalists to gain more reactions from readers.



Additionally, the journalists interviewed different people in different angles,including the refugee,volunteer,government official and so on.With various views, readers will get to know an overall living and public opinion environment.Personally speaking,the report is like a objective documentary.


When it comes to the materials chosen by journalists, they pay more attention to others’ opinion.From refugees’ visual angels,readers can easily relate to their feelings and actions.


Undoubtedly,the application of aerial photography and imagenary really give me a clear acknowledge for the area and routes,which show a macroscopical situation.
Even though It really does a great job in multimedia,there are drawbacks about it.From my perspective,the report lacks the introduction of backgrounds.If the graphics about political and national environment are added, readers can be more likely to be aware of the severe situation.The storytelling can be well improved in completeness.
R.I.P.
