4 ms·
I think a great part of that frustration is down to long-form magazine features being ported to wired.com, where brevity is better suited to the web-page form.
by stevejalim 14y ago
I think a great part of that frustration is down to long-form magazine features being ported to wired.com, where brevity is better suited to the web-page form.
Personally, I think almost all of the writing in Wired is excellent - well crafted and edited and laid out within interesting designs. Yes, while there are pretty common 'paint a picture' set-ups and more detail about the actual people involved than you'd get in news (for sure) and non-US feature writing (my view), that's part of the reason I keep buying the US print copy of Wired (even in the UK), and enjoy settling down to read it.
- jessriedel 14y agoI have the exact same revulsion to this style writing when I see it in print. The only upside is that, in print, it's easier for me to skip through the article and get to the actual content.
- sophacles 14y agoSee the think you are doing here is being completely and utterly disingenuous. What you are talking about as content is a list of facts of the event. What you are pissed about is a list of facts about the person involved. I like the facts about the person involved, the circumstance and some speculation about their mindset. I like that, if you want facts about the sequence of events, read a crime report. Or even better, don't read the article, you don't have to just because it is there. If you have revulsion, find a medium that works for you, they exist, don't complain.