Don’t you think that constantly highlighting (bolding out) few important bits contributes to a culture of only skimming and thus possibly even more adoption of barely fact-checked knowledge?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Don’t you think that constantly highlighting (bolding out) few important bits contributes to a culture of only skimming and thus possibly even more adoption of barely fact-checked knowledge?
Now that you mention it, Yes I think so too!
Highlighting or emphasizing certain parts do create a culture of only skimming but I somehow think it is much more better than not highlighting or emphasizing your point at all. People now are usually in a hurry to read and will only skim a long article and/or mostly focus on the images being presented. Emphasizing your points makes the reader easily grasp the whole article.
I do apologize for the many bold parts in my answer in here though. :)
I don’t mind because I’m a reader. Yes, I *do* skim, and especially for subtitles, but I’m a fast [skim] reader and thus often find other words than those you highlighted.
Yet, if you look for example at the Daily Mail, they have an actual TL;DR: section above each article. Interestingly enough, it’s a news property which isn't know for having a highly intellectual audience.
Perfect example, picked from their actual front page: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6161741/Feds-probe-suspicious-money-transfers-Trump-Tower-meeting.html
Remember though that highlighting targets eyeballs and can thus be a mechanic to bias.
>highlighting targets eyeballs and can thus be a mechanic to bias
Can't agree more and is actually a common media tactic nowadays :)
Nice book excerpt in the Guardian today.