So what incite am i to gain from this? Also website has disappointing and disappointment on the list which seems a bit strange
A creative respondent has offered a word-cloud which captures the extent to which the ABC has capitulated to the three-word slogan school of political analysis and debate:http://www.flickr.com/photos/64041833@N04/5855602561/in/photostream
So we get "embarrassing" and "embarrasing". Doesn't say much for the ABC's professed quality control (their headnote explains). But I wonder how many times it had to be misspelt to qualify for the cloud?
It would be interesting to find out the extent to which these words have been used in ABC news and commentary during the past year.
Do they have another one for Tony ?
Seriously ABC.. why?This isn't surprising.. since when has a pollie inspired more +ve than -ve? Also I think negative feelings will always be "louder" than positive ones.I'd like to see ones for Malcolm Turnbull and Bob Brown. Just in case we see something heartening.But it's just a word cloud.. it doesn't show the "average sentiment", ie. the "overall score", it just highlights the most used single words. So the result is naturally sensationalist. They could have done this in a way which gives a more meaningful result.. but then they'd have to actually interpret the words. So.. yeah it looks great but doesn't mean anything.
Is it just me or are a majority of the words the same size?
I was very disappointed in the ABC for stooping to tabloid level with this. Capture the attention of a nation without imparting anything of worth whatsoever.Word clouds merely highlight the most commonly used few words. They don't show aggregate meaning or sentiment.Say 10 people submit. 5 say "strong" and the over 5 each say "weak", "apathetic", "boring", "useless" and "blah". Guess which word is biggest, and so giving the completely wrong impression.Bad ABC. Please leave the meaningless sensationalism to the tabloids.
COMMENTS ARE CLOSED