The most successful creators of Meograph and Storify pages are united by one thing: they’re skilled editors and curators who know how to look at content posted on multiple social networks and pull out the pieces that will best help them to tell a story.
Staci Baird, a journalist who currently is the Internet & Social Media Strategist for the Stanford School of Engineering, says “Aggregating, analyzing, providing context and insight is an important part of journalism today.””
New to Storify? Find useful tips in this article.
As many honor college students find they do on a frequent basis, today I was discussing with a few fellow classmates about favorite books from our childhood. I was pleased to find that my friends had enjoyed the Little House on the Prairie series just as much as I had. One aspect that I mentioned that always puzzled me was Mary’s blindness, which the book stated, in almost an offhand way, was due to scarlet fever. Not a lot more information was included in the book of her being ill, from what I remember.
A team of medical researchers have since determined that scarlet fever was probably not the cause for Mary’s blindness. According to an article from the Associated Press, “historical documents, biographical records and other material suggests another disease that causes swelling in the brain and upper spinal cord was the most likely culprit.” From Wilder’s letters and unpublished memoir, we know that she was unsure about Mary’s illness. Scarlet fever was most likely used because it was such a common and feared illness at the time.
The article on The Daily Mail’s website has the same basic information as the Associated Press’ article, except including more background information about The Little House on the Prairie, perhaps because they are a British news source and Little House on the Prairie is more popular in America. The Daily Mail also includes the major points of the article in bold before the article, and has a lot more art than the AP article, with both pictures and a video at the end. This is probably because The Daily Mail is a tabloid.
As I said, I’ve been going through an evolution on this issue. I’ve always been adamant that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally. And that’s why, in addition to everything we’ve done in this administration — rolling back Don’t Ask Don’t Tell so that outstanding Americans can serve our country; whether it’s no longer defending the Defense (of) Marriage Act, which tried to federalize what has historically state law — I’ve stood on the side of broader equality for the LGBT community.
And I’d hesitated on gay marriage because, in part, I thought civil unions would be sufficient, that that was something that would give people hospital visitation rights and other elements that we take for granted. And I was sensitive to the fact that, for a lot of people, the word ‘marriage’ is something that evokes very powerful traditions, religious beliefs, and so forth.
But I have to tell you that over the course of several years, as I talked to friends and family and neighbors, when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed, monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together; when I think about those soldiers or airmen or Marines, sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf, and yet feel constrained even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they’re not able to commit themselves in a marriage — at a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that same-sex couples should be able to get married.”