WIRED Magazine and Adobe has teamed up to develop a digital-based form of the magazine that is much more than a simple website. It is suppose to combine the best from both of the print and web worlds. Using Adobe Air and tablet technology, this video shows a live demo of what could be the future of magazine.
Almost a year ago, in an interview with the New York Times, Chris Anderson, WIRED’s editor in chief, hinted on the print magazine’s need for a brand new direction in this digital age. “‘We need to do something that doesn’t exist online, and do it in a superior way. Otherwise we should just do it online,’” said Anderson, who is not part of the magazine’s website operation in any way.
Certainly, this kind of tablet-magazine does not exist, YET. While the tablet technology has been around for a while, rich media content has not been available to truly take full advantage of it. Not so anymore! So, will this really be the future of magazines, print or otherwise? How soon will this become reality? Consider what it will take for the already financially-strapped news media to begin an industry-wide development with this platform; and how fast consumer adoption of the technology would reach a critical mass?
No matter. The driver of this kind of rich media tablet experience (like iPad) will most likely not be the news media (ha! you wish!) but by personal entertainment like movies, music and games. It is certainly good to see a new way of imagining the future of magazines in this seemingly new platform. It is also great to see the news media (at least one of them) leading the development and use of a new platform rather than always trying to play catch-up with technology.
However, the most important and unanswered question - will people be more inclined to pay for a digital news product this way? Perhaps, this recent study, “Changing Models: A Global Perspective on Paying for Content Online,” by the Nielsen Company could shed some light on what consumers now consider worth springing a buck for.
The Grad-rate Map Tool, using Google Map, shows you state and district graduation rate data. These data include demographic data as well as grad data from the past decade. So, the first thing I did was to check the graduation rate for my old high school’s district.
To my surprise, I discovered that the class year before my own graduating year achieved a 98% rate (which was about 30% higher than national average). It is the highest (by 10% or so) comparing to all the other graduating years, before or after, in the same district.
How I remember all those smart ass upperclass students that my mother just won’t stop comparing me to….
The trend map graphically display state-level data over the past decade. The U.S. national average has been (slowly) improving from 66.4% in 1995-96 to 69.2% in 2005-06.
(More education-related infographics from Edweek here)
It shows an overview of the total funds released, to-be released and received by states. It also breaks down to the state-by-state level with detail numbers for each funding category.
Tuesday is the inauguration of Barack Obama. Here’s a look at previous inaugural speeches’ mentions of education.
What will Obama say about education in his speech (if any)? Well, if he does say anything significant about education, it will be added to this widget.
McCain has long been an opponent to earmarks spending. But his singling out (and what seems to be a mischaracterization) of the projector as an example to criticize Obama soon drew some defensive responses from the scientific community (Chicago Tribune story, and Science News story.)
But what are earmarks anyway?
More importantly how much were spent and how are they really being applied?
Here are some good online sources to find out for yourself.
Original pages for thie Sunlight Labs project are no longer available. Couldn’t find any replacement but plesae click here to similar or new pages from Sunlight Labs on earmakrs. 02/11/09
Visualize earmarks spending:
• Most by state per capita = Alaska
• Most by state total = California (change “bubble size” selector choice to see this)
• Most by agency total = Department of Defense
• Most by type of organization = For-profit organizations
2007 & 2008 defense earmarks The Favor Factory Year 2008 and Year 2007, Seattle Times.
This resource enables user to search by state and by lawmaker - very user-friendly and accessible. The database only includes defense earmarks, by far the largest category of earmarks spending.
Of interest since it is election season:
• Obama’s 2008 and 2007 defense earmarks records.
• McCain’s 2008 and 2007 defense earmarks records.
Official database Earmarks records, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
This is the least user-friendly resource I found (certainly met my expectation for government web applications). However, it is supposed to be the most complete. If you are interested in siffing through tons of data, this one is for you. Data included in this site:
Follow the trend of news and blogs coverage of the Presidential candidates on PresidentialWatch08.
This screen shot shows Obama, McCain and Palin. On the site, user can also select Paul, Edwards, Clinton, Biden, and Huckabee. It’s interesting to see how “news” and “blogs” stats correspond or don’t correspond with each other.
PresidentialWatch08 also has a pretty telling map of the political blogosphere. It has not been updated since June though. It labels, ranks the blogs and displays inter-links as well.
As the focus of visual journalism on the web shifting more and more to video, still photographers and still images seem to be left in the dust. But, still images, by capturing the decisive and memorable moments, at times can be so much more powerful in delivering a message.
Don’t get me wrong. Video is a wonderful and persuasive storytelling tool. It can do what still images can’t (otherwise there wouldn’t be this billion-dollars “moving pictures” business). And I enjoy shooting videos myself.
I just wonder if some are giving up on still images as a storytelling tool too easily.
Plotting Immigrant Population, Detailed Process and $$$
The graphic uses a maze scheme (maze, very fitting) to take you through the detailed steps indicating application fees at various stages. I do wish there was an approximate tally of fees somewhere to compare with the number in the “cost of being smuggled” factoid box.
The maze flows into an U.S. map that uses size bubbles to indicate the largest immigrant populations spots. Along the map, factoid boxes keep readers engaged as they exit the maze. These factoids also further elaborate the story of immigration. I see good potential for building some interactivity around this piece.
And check out this graphical representation of U.S. border patrols for Mexico and Canada. See the cute little pup on the Canadian border versus the man with the gun and guard dogs on the Mexico border? Effective and fun.
I must admit I only saw this detail after looking at it closely. But that’s all part of the fun of discovery eh?
Graphic successfully done? Can you answer these Questions:
• Can you estimate the total application fees one would’ve paid to the U.S. government at the end?
• Which state has the largest immigrant population?
How does the U.S. process compare to other countries’? Well, that’s for another time.
p.s. A shout out to Mary Ann Zehr’s post in her blog Learning the Language where I saw the links to these graphics.
It is hard to put in perspective the time and money one invests to become an U.S. citizen. I’ve recently came across (on a blog I follow) a couple of very nicely done infographics that illustrate these points.
As someone that had gone through the entire process and also temped at an immigration attorney’s office before, I can honestly say it is not the easiest to grasp. These two infographics combined do provide a pretty good picture of this looong and very costly process. Why aren’t there more graphics like this? (if you know of any other cool pieces, do let me know.)
This graphic doubles as a commentary of the long and drawn-out process than mere delivery of information (nothing wrong with a little commentary).
But, in my opinion, the cartoon figures selected to represent various groups of applicants are so stereotypical they seem slightly biased. Nonetheless, it is one of the best explanatory graphic that sums up the woes of this process . I especially like how they indicate total time to immigrate.
It’s cute and to the point.
One possible impediment of the application process is the costs (all comes down to $$$). Forget lawyer fees and other expenses. Application fees paid to the government are not a small amount to bear. This is well illustrated in the next graphic.
Graphic successfully done? Can you answer these Questions:
• Which is the longest immigration route?
• What is the minimum time needed to become an U.S. citizen?
Interesting video to say the least. It’s amazing what this artist did AND with the concept of filming it. I can see this as a center piece of a multimedia installation show.
Who?
Hooyi (/hʊ'i/), the alter ego of a web designer, multimedia producer, photojournalist, and programmer.
Loc:Hooyi is where I come to blog about designs, web development, multimedia, visual journalism and all the areas that sum up my professional life.
Most Recent Comments