Weather the pictures show the new stories more effectively or not is still widely debated nowadays. I personally agree that pictures can deliver the new stories on TV and in newspapers more effectively compared to words.
Firstly, pictures can often catch the attention from the audiences/ readers. The pictures that shown from TV or newspapers are usually colorful and at a significant place. Based on a research, the reports that accompanied with pictures always read/ watched by more people. Newspapers without any pictures are hard to catch the attention from their subscribers. For example, you might notice a fascinating picture on TV, then you might follow and watch the whole story. Furthermore, stories with pictures can explain the ideas more clearly, and save time for the audience. A number of people nowadays like to skim the whole article, and only pick the main points to read. Pictures can deliver the whole ideas much faster than words. For instance, a report that trying to inform the local community that a bridge has recently been built. A picture of the new bridge with outstanding titles can fully deliver the message in seconds. Ultimately, reports with pictures can attract more youngsters to read or watch the reports. Youngsters usually pay more attention to colorful image other than a report full of words. Despite the fact that the books for youngsters always have cartoons or pictures inside accompanied with words.
I do understand the opposing view, which is that pictures in reports can potentially distract audience’s attention from the content. Nevertheless, I feel that a good amount of distraction can help the readers focus more or become more curious about the stories.
Overall, I believe that pictures are more effectively than words as it can improve the overall reading rate, deliver the stories faster and can accepted by youngsters.
Weather the
pictures
show
the new
stories
more
effectively
or not is
still
widely
debated nowadays. I
personally
agree
that
pictures
can
deliver
the new
stories
on TV and in newspapers more
effectively
compared to words.
Firstly
,
pictures
can
often
catch the
attention
from the audiences/ readers. The
pictures
that shown from TV or newspapers are
usually
colorful and at a significant place. Based on a research, the
reports
that
accompanied with
pictures
always read/
watched
by more
people
. Newspapers without any
pictures
are
hard
to catch the
attention
from their subscribers.
For example
, you might notice a fascinating
picture
on TV, then you might follow and
watch
the whole
story
.
Furthermore
,
stories
with
pictures
can
explain
the
ideas
more
clearly
, and save time for the audience. A number of
people
nowadays like to skim the whole article, and
only
pick the main points to read.
Pictures
can
deliver
the whole
ideas
much faster than words.
For instance
, a
report
that trying to inform the local community that a bridge has recently
been built
. A
picture
of the new bridge with outstanding titles can
fully
deliver
the message in seconds.
Ultimately
,
reports
with
pictures
can attract more youngsters to read or
watch
the
reports
. Youngsters
usually
pay more
attention
to colorful image other than a
report
full of words. Despite the fact that the books for youngsters always have cartoons or
pictures
inside
accompanied with
words.
I do understand the opposing view, which is that
pictures
in
reports
can
potentially
distract audience’s
attention
from the content.
Nevertheless
, I feel that a
good
amount of distraction can
help
the readers focus more or become more curious about the stories.
Overall
, I believe that
pictures
are more
effectively
than words as it can
improve
the
overall
reading rate,
deliver
the
stories
faster and can
accepted
by youngsters.