Why the future of journalism is Modular

We can see that there are strong preferences for “Relevant data and facts” and “An understanding of the full context of the story”. In my previous research it was clear that users found the lack of both of these as a weakness of current models of journalism – with a repeatedly expressed demand for greater contextual information. This is also indicated by the fact that a “Summary of the issue” is seen as less valuable than context or data. This feels a significant finding, and reflects what I’ve heard in previous research – that summaries with little contextual information (e.g. Breaking News push alerts) are unhelpful to users hoping to understand a story.

We gave respondents the opportunity to add further insight as to why they made their choices, and there were some rich and useful contributions which will help shape further work:

“I prefer to have as many facts available to me as possible when regarding an important and serious issue. A quick overview is OK, but I much preferred being able to find out why this all started properly and why the president of Belarus was under the microscope.”

“I prefer hard facts and data within my news articles so that I can form my own opinions over interpretation and opinion from dubiously related experts and journalists.”

“I’m disabled and there are days I wouldn’t be able to take in all the facts. On those days shorter, more direct articles are better for me. However, on topics I find important, having access to the full facts is important.”

“I like the opportunity of a quick read alongside the ability to gain extra data and the full context of a news story.”

“I found the community impact the most engaging and relevant to me. I am interested in solutions because it helps me to feel positive and find a way to contribute through my own life.”

“I usually prefer to have objective data and facts and ideally all sides and implications of a global event. I like this particular way to present it, in brief sections that I can choose to read or skip, depending on each particular story, but knowing all the information is there in one place if I need it.”

“For a story like this one which is ongoing, I would initially make most use of the full story as it wasn’t an issue I felt particularly informed about before reading.  However afterwards I would prefer the updates and facts from daily events as I feel this would give me a better understanding of the changing situation.”

“I don’t have a lot of time and concentration. So breaking the whole article down into chunks helps. If I had more time and energy I would want to read the full context.”

“If I already know the background of the news story I would just likely read about the current updates and maybe refresh my memory about the context and facts/data.”

The perceived value of solutions approaches, or an understanding of the impact on individuals and their communities, was less pronounced. In truth, that may be because of an imperfect story choice on my part. There were only somewhat indirect impacts from the Belarus border crisis on UK communities at the time, and there was not an obvious route towards a solution. Therefore, this particular article was quite weak on those aspects. 

Respondents reflected this in their feedback and so this is likely not a fair test of those elements of the modular story. However, reflecting on the writing of those modules and the survey feedback, in truth it may not be possible to write solutions content which fits well into a modular format. Respondents suggested that the modular option they’d be least likely to consume was the one which analysed the impact on their community. That being said, almost 43% of people would be “very” or “somewhat” likely to use it.

After respondents had read the articles, we asked them to rate how well informed they now felt about the situation which played out on the Belarus border in November 2021.

Respondents who had read the modular version reported an average rating of 6.86 on this question, with respondents who read the BBC News article reporting an average rating of 6.51. It’s worth noting that the BBC News article was 783 words long, which compares very closely with the 793 words used in the discrete modules of the prototype article. Clearly, how informed users feel after reading an article is an important measure of efficacy. Here the modular article does better than the BBC article, but only slightly – around 5% better.

We then asked respondents to rate their interest in the articles and how enjoyable, useful and relatable they found them.

For the BBC News article, responses were as follows: