Visuals are commonly used to represent news subjects in mass media. Due to their preferences,
individuals consider picturing be more beneficial than wording. In my opinion, I would rather agree with
the effectiveness of using visual resources.
Using pictures to describe the events on TV and in newspapers is commonly spread nowadays. One of
the main benefits of that is derived from psychological types of people. Auditors are focused on voice
over and texts, whether visual typed ones naturally understand the information with the help of
pictures. Statistics worldwide proves that percentage of visual consumers is significantly higher than
listeners and readers. Thus, mass media resources enriched with visual resources are eventually on top.
On the other hand, modern technologies of marketing with rich variety of picturesque production made
audience being full and picky. To cite an example, most of people would rather watch a blockbuster,
depicturing a famous story, with high quality and effects than to read the same information in the text
version, or even watch some relevant documentary. Visualizing now is a demand of marketing,
extremely essential for competing. For instance, there’s no other way to get kids’ attention but to use
visual resources. As well as to involve some specific groups, suffering of different kinds of disorders
(dyslexia, deafness), who are really dependent of pictures accompanying news stories.
In my opinion, the advantage of using pictures by mass media is evident – it helps to get the information
easier, improves comprehension and attracts more consumers. It also engages different age groups and
types of audience.