New Poynter study on what gets readers' attention

Not really. I was steered to the videos because it contained information that the story didn't. If you read the story, which I did before I turned to the video, you'll see there isn't a lot of depth or hard info in it -- it's almost an intro. I don't think you can accurately conclude that video was more attention-grabbing than print. I've said on this board that newspaper Web sites ought to have less writing and more video. I envisioned the video drawing people in, and if customers wanted more, they would click for additional information in writing. This was the opposite, and I'm not sure it A.) tells us anything or B.) is the most effective way to draw in people. You have kind of a small refer on Romenesko, then you have a kind of drab, just-words story, then after you scroll down, you have a video and a link to another video. The videos are the third element you see: small photo refer, story, video. There was a transcript of one video but not of the second.

 

Oh Frank I was just trying to press your buttons.

Mission accomplished! ;D