A STUDY OF STYLE IN PRINT MAGAZINES VERSUS SCIENCE WEBSITES TO DETERMINE HOW SCIENCE WRITING CHANGES
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Аннотация:
The migration of science journalism from physical print to digital platforms has precipitated a fundamental shift in stylistic norms. This article examines the profound differences between the stylistic architecture of legacy print magazines (e.g., National Geographic, Scientific American) and contemporary digital science hubs (e.g., Wired, Live Science, Ars Technica). By systematically analyzing structure, syntax, and audience engagement through the lens of media theory and classical rhetoric, we determine that science writing has fundamentally evolved from a linear, narrative-focused discipline rooted in institutional ethos into a modular, hyperlinked, and search-optimized format driven by the attention economy. The change represents a shift from interpretation to exploration, redefining both the role of the science writer and the epistemological relationship with the reader.
Article Details
Как цитировать:
Библиографические ссылки:
McLuhan, M. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. – New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964. – 359 pp.
Fahnestock, J. Accommodating Science: The Rhetorical Life of Scientific Facts. – Written Communication, 1986. – pp. 275–296.
Nielsen, J. F-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Content. – Nielsen Norman Group, 2006. – Web.
Brumfiel, G. Science journalism: Supplanting the old media? – Nature, 2009. – pp. 274–277.
Bolter, J. D., & Grusin, R. Remediation: Understanding New Media. – Cambridge: MIT Press, 1999. – 312 pp.
Lessig, L. Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. – New York: Basic Books, 1999. – 288 pp.
Aristotle. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. – Approx. 38 pp.