Snackable Content is described bite size (easy to digest) chunks of information that can be quickly consumed and shared.
Mobile apps such as Instagram, Vine, and Snapchats, for instance—are perfect examples of snackable content.
What are some negative aspect of snackable content? Do you think snackable content is substantive enough to deliver value to people?
Snackable content is good and bad, as is everything in this world I suppose. I think that snackable content has created this idea in our society that if you read the first couple lines of an article that you are somehow an expert on it. I've seen users online go on and on about a topic as if they are professional experts and researchers in the topic when in reality, they have read these snackable sized articles and content about a specific area of interest.
I believe that society has created a notion that if you know a couple facts about a topic, you are good to go. I think that snackable content is great for the person who wants to know the headlines but doesn't have the time to read up about it completely. It becomes dangerous when users feel that they are experts in the area when only reading these snackable articles.
Snackable content is good and bad, as is everything in this world I suppose. I think that snackable content has created this idea in our society that if you read the first couple lines of an article that you are somehow an expert on it. I've seen users online go on and on about a topic as if they are professional experts and researchers in the topic when in reality, they have read these snackable sized articles and content about a specific area of interest.
I believe that society has created a notion that if you know a couple facts about a topic, you are good to go. I think that snackable content is great for the person who wants to know the headlines but doesn't have the time to read up about it completely. It becomes dangerous when users feel that they are experts in the area when only reading these snackable articles.
I think snackable content influences our attention span and our ability to dedicate our attention to long-form content. I've seen 10 second vines that were more entertaining than 2 hour long films, but I wonder how much of this is can be attributed to the fact that Iʻm constantly exposed to more "bite sized" types of content and have a difficult time immersing myself in my longer forms of content.
Mari is also right in that snackable sized content is more framed and cannot provide in-depth, detailed information on a topic or story. For example, the recent live Hawaiʻi Snapchat story got a lot of backlash within the local Hawaiʻi community because users felt that the snaps included in the story did not accurately reflect what life in Hawaiʻi is really like. Snaps can only be a few seconds long, and only a limited number of snaps are included in a given story. This is definitely a negative aspect to snackable content, but I think once you understand the limitations of this kind of content you know what to expect.
Having watched a lot of movies from the 1950s and 1960s, which generally have very slow pacing, I think that one aspect of snackable content to praise is that our attention to each moment has been refined and gets magnified and focused much more on the quality of the quick take, and if it's not really good of a take, in that instance, then I generally don't want to look at it for a long time. So, in some respects, I think this focus has improved overall visual quality, at least in terms of video quality, in many ways. When I watch older movies, I find myself often squirming in my chair when the director holds a pedestrian shot for 15 seconds, 20 seconds, 30 seconds, 60 seconds, etc., because the artistry of video is in part the artistry of seeing a situation from many interesting angles, and video allows us to do that, in very dynamic ways, and a director with a great eye can help me see things I never would have seen before through such choices; often today those come in very snackable forms, and if I find some perspective not that interesting, another one surely will be coming soon. ... Snackable text, on the other hand, I find to be shallow and insignificant in most cases (not always, though); with text forms, I'm looking to dive into the content in a more sustained manner.
I agree with all comments shared. Snakable can influence the depth of students responses and answers to content questions. If they only have snapped and not read further then their responses would be limited or have added fluff. But there are other concerns like context awareness as discussed in this recent conference paper:
file:///C:/Users/dferdinand/Downloads/main.pdf
Best regards,
Debra
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Informality