Clarified to Calcium
Media reports often delve into areas where topics demand extra clarification. What is that new piece of technology designed to do? When you made that reference you were referring to what recent trend in behavior? Often introduced with the stock phrase, “Of course,” these little moments of additional explanation are designed to aid the unaware but do they work to destroy focus? At what point does the insistent work to clarify leave the audience with a complete lack of focus?
Constant clarification works to insure the forest’s trees are equally visible. Working from a position of concern for the audience, reports that constantly clarify have at their core a fear that missing certain trees eliminate the ability to see the forest. Perhaps there are critical details that must be understood, but if missing certain details renders a story beyond comprehension a deeper question needs to be asked- is it worth reporting?
Does the extra info make a big difference? Do the unaware flee a news report when they’re may help the unaware audience members they often come at such a rate that focus? Perhaps a dangerous hazard to toy with, work that allows the audience to miss certain details in order to see the larger story at play has major benefits. Never let the perfect destroy the good and any work that disregards focus for specificity risks losing more than it gains.