I just had another duh! moment, while watching this video at New Scientist on the scientific reasons for reforming health care. No, this has nothing to do with reforming health care, it's about my being annoyed with having to sit through a video to learn information that is much more swiftly and easily conveyed via text.
It's a personal pet peeve. Lately I've noticed a lot of websites insist on placing their content in video form. Sometimes they offer interviews with experts, or conversations between two of their regular writers. Often you have to listen to people introduce themselves, and introduce the topic, and maybe banter for a minute or two—all those bits you'd skim over if you were reading online. I find it annoying and rarely click on videos, but I really wanted to hear this scientific argument for health care reform so I clicked on the video.
And watched an ad. Bingo! That's why so many web magazines try to steer their readers toward becoming watchers. They need the revenue from the ads you're forced to watch.
I don't have a problem with websites that try to make money—my own website runs ads, after all. Ads are the only way, just about, for many news organizations to stay in business and pay journalists. I really don't mind clicking on ads now and again, or even watching them, if that's the only way the fine journalists at New Scientist can get paid.
All I ask is that the information be presented to me in a form that doesn't waste my time. I didn't even watch the video; it played in the background while I typed this blog post. If anyone wants to sit through it and tell me what it says, I'm all ears. Err, eyes.