Web vs. Print

How do these two medium differ? I conducted a search for Barbie satire in both print and on the web in order to seek out the differences which set these medium apart. This is what I found:

There are distinct differences in the type of content within each medium. The print medium still pulls rank when it comes to academic discussion. I found the articles in print to be more thorough and fully researched than the ones on the web. The tone of these articles is different as well. I found books on Barbie satire which sound as if they could be someone's dissertation. Though I can't say this was wholly true for articles in print. Adios Barbie includes an article entitled Klaus Barbie and other dolls I'd like to see which was more similar to those found on the web because of its more personal tone. Personal anecdots and opinions make up much of this article. It read much as a magazine article would and that too I realize is part of the print medium. However what was interesting is that on the web I found only part of the article I had read in print. Not suprisingly it was the most humorous as well as the best quick read portion of her article. This partializing is common of text on the web. Many times what you're getting on HTML is only a portion of what was actually written as a whole for print.

The personal element involved in writings on the web is used everywhere. Articles such as Barbie and Me by Crystal Kile which give personal accounts of one's Barbie experience can be found in abundance. I even came across a site where anyone can read and share personal stories about Barbie.

Overall, sites on the web are shorter in content and lighter in tone than those in print. There is a large emphasis on the sharing of one's personal experiences and a focused attempt to mock Barbie using visual graphics and images. A favorite for Barbie satirists is to mock her by creating new prototypes such as Kile's Dinner Roll Barbie depicted here on the right. Writing on both the web and in print can achieve this. Both can add pictures to their descriptions, but the cost of doing so in print limits its use. Consequently, images are found accompanying text with much more frequency on the web. Also, images of distortion are popular when satirizing Barbie as images of this sort are easily achieved when using a low resolution such as that required by the web. Use of distortion when satirizing Barbie can also be important because of copywrite and trademark issues.

The web caters to the casual looker and the impatient seeker. The articles are generally shorter in length, but most importantly one can find links upon links, upon links. When reading print articles, often times a list of referenced materials is given which the reader can look to find more information on the subject. Only someone conducting a thorough search will actually go on to do this. Otherwise the references are forgotten or even more likely, completely ignored. The web's system of links provides a way to look up information immediately. There is no search involved; simply a click of the button and you're already there. The process takes seconds as opposed to a library search which would take much longer.

A serious researcher would also have great success in a web search, but because of the type of content (as I discussed above) found on the web, it should provide only a starting point or suplement to one's research. As far as academic discussion is concerned, as a researcher I still feel that print material has more to offer. Many more types of information can be found on the web, but many of them would not be credible or worthwhile for basing one's information on without consulting different informational sources.