Just this past july we rode the Hurtigruten from Bergen to Trondheim. Although the upper decks of the MV Polarlys are like a modest and tasteful cruise ship, and the majority of passengers were there for the scenery and the day-trip excursions, they do still haul cargo and commuters. At every stop there are cars and cargo being put on and off the cargo deck. One surprise was when I got up at 4am to see the famous road bridge at Måløy, and walking through the Panorama deck found there were a dozen people sacked out sleeping on the couches. Apparently you can buy a no-stateroom ticket cheap, and people do.
> the country boasts one of the most undulatory coastlines in the world, measuring an astonishing 64,000 miles (by comparison, the entire United States coastline measures 95,471 miles).
This accounts for the fact that contrary to the article’s stated length of 64,000 miles, the World Factbook gives the length as 15,626 miles¹ and the World Resources Institute once gave the same length as 33,056 miles².
The World Factbook gives Norway’s coastline as being 80% as long as the length it gives for the United States’, and the WRI gave the same percentage as about 40%. Contrary to this, the article claims Norway’s coastline is 150% of that of the US. I doubt this figure, and no source is given.
EDIT: I misread — the article’s actual percentage is a far more reasonable 67%. I withdraw my objection.
What is the cost to produce a page like this? Must be high, versus the cost of a normal article with inline images. I cannot imagine that the ROI is worth it. Therefore I think that this article format will disappear for economic reasons.
It had over 3.5 Million page views the first week. Estimates are that it took about three man-months to write and design the long article. But that was two years ago, and without any of the tools and experience they have now.
That's expensive, but napkin-calculations can be done:
Average yearly at NY Times according to Google is: $98 167
That means about $33 000 plus some taxes and costs for three monte, say, $50 000 then.
Can you sell one ad space in such an article at $50 000 / 3 500 000 = $14.29 per 1k impression?
NY Times sells ads at $6.29 for 1k impression on their sports pages. On the Snow Fall article three such ads would be enough to cover the estimated costs.
As a comparative note: A full page print ad costs $10 per estimated reader, it is possible that this Norway article is also published in the regular print, and will therefore recuperate some costs there as well.
I don't think so. If you look at theatre for comparison (which is also an act of storytelling), most plays are simple amateur pieces, that anybody with some skills and knowledge can put together. However there are also very expensive professional theaters that that sometimes tell the same stories as the amateurs for many thousands times the cost of the amateur pies. Yet expensive theatre is found in every major city.
To keep the analogy, NY-times is doing web-page stories Broadway-style. Perhaps they found an unexplored marked, perhaps it is too soon. But sooner or later, the art-form of story telling on the web is going to be taken to the next level done by professionals for a lot more money than any amateurs telling the same story.
You forget that sometimes we go to events and places not because of the places or events themselves, but for their image or the people we expect will also attend. The same doesn't work for the web.
I wondered about that too, but after hearing a talk by one of the lead tech dudes involved with The Guardian and the like, and after seeing some of the 'frameworks' that are popping up specifically for this purpose (Ractive.js comes to mind), I think that even after an initial 'slump', we'll start seeing more and more of this kind of stuff.
In fact, I'm betting on it by trying to find a market for being the creator of things like this. I haven't gotten started yet, but it's at the top of my 'business opportunities' list. I think I mostly just need to find someone who is good at visualizing data, or dive into that myself.
I can see Mike Bostock among the creators - D3 creator can definitely accomlish a great feat in short time! His data visualisation/storytelling skills are just amazing!
It's a big improvement over previous attempts at this sort of multi-format presentation. I'll give NYT a lot of credit for pushing things in this direction, even if some of their early efforts fell a bit short. (Some previous articles in this style were too cute for their own good, and wound up hard to read).
agreed; they appear one of the few who embrace the new possibilities in publishing and actually try to come up with something different and are not afraid to make some mistakes in the process…
i'd love to see other (news) publishers to walk this path as the options are there, they just need some creativity
Apparently NYT had a big come-to-Jesus meeting earlier this year, where they discussed the challenges their business model is facing, and resolved to do something about it. Who's to say whether this stuff will move the needle for them. But at least they're doing interesting things, and I support them.
NYT can't necessarily see the future (when it comes to journalism, nobody can). But it recognizes that its future lies in high-quality articles, and it's investing in new definitions of quality. Many of its competitors are moving in the opposite direction, adopting practices from content farms and clickbait sites. In the long run, NYT will need to do a lot more to rethink its economics. But for now, its investment in quality is probably a good move.
Apparently NYT had a big come-to-Jesus meeting earlier this year, where they discussed the challenges their business model is facing, and resolved to do something about it. Who's to say whether this stuff will move the needle for them. But at least they're doing interesting things, and I support them.
IMO they need to get the basics right first. Why, for instance, can't I use their iPad app to access all of the content from the print edition, and in a similarly-dense format?
Never taken the Hurtigruten, but if you're after a bit of an unorthodox vacation I can't recommend anything more highly than the Lofoten Islands in summer.
Fly into Tromsø, spend a couple of days there, then rent a car and head west. Gorgeous scenery, twenty-four-hour sunlight, great hiking, and mild weather - we loved it.
You can also fly to Bodø and take the ferry from there to Moskenes.
I would recommend spending more time in Moskenesøya and less in Tromsø (or just avoid it). Go to Tromsø during the winter for seeing the northern lights instead :D
Not sure why the focus here is on whatever incremental tech NYTimes used to create this article.
The cultural commentary of how parts of the world are now moving at vastly different speeds to the point where we are almost seeing bona fide time-travel seems WAY more important to think about.
> The cultural commentary of how parts of the world are now moving at vastly different speeds to the point where we are almost seeing bona fide time-travel seems WAY more important to think about.
It's an admirable attempt at telling a story and I appreciate the journalism. Perhaps I'm ADD, but I just don't have the attention span to get engrossed in this kind of format and follow every word through to the end.
Mike Bostock (the author of D3.js) is a NYT employee. His name is listed in the final credits for this piece, and a lot of other NYT content. I assume he is often called in to sprinkle some D3 magic onto a lot of their interactive articles.
That globe was a great way to visualize why the sun never sets in the summer above the arctic circle. It would be a great teaching resource especially with some way to adjust the dates.
I'm seduced. But I think this technique is based on tricking those who enjoy reading conventional text articles. It pulls the rug out from under them as soon as they start scrolling. It's mischievous and, in some ways, quite typical of the NY Times.
Some pics if anyone cares: http://cortesi.smugmug.com/Scandinavia-2014/Trip-Segments/Hu...