There is a reason behind my obsession with National Geographic magazine. First, it is well designed and aesthetically pleasing. NationalGeographic.com does an excellent job in reflecting the print publication’s design and aesthetics with advanced interactives, such as the DEEPSEA CHALLENGE feature previously analyzed.
Second, National Geographic prides itself on “inspiring people to care about the planet” and it achieves this through dynamic photography of the natural wonders of this earth and clear, compelling content that the average reader can understand.
This is evident on NationalGeographic.com with the extensive amount of photography showcased, such as the Photo of the Day feature, and by the multimedia additions that enhance the print magazine’s features. The dominate age group of visitors to NationalGeographic.com is young adults, the dominant income level of visitors is less affluent and the education level of visitors is dominated by those without a college education and those with a college education (the minority is those with graduate level education), according to Quantcast’s report. This demonstrates the understandability for all of National Geographic’s content.
Despite the factors that influence my adoration of the publication and its website, there are a few flaws. There is always room for improvement. First, the homepage appears cluttered due to the numerous sections coexisting. There is one for explorers, three for social media and a block of editors’ picks.
Second, I would encourage NationalGeographic.com to branch out to additional social media. Facebook and Twitter are two social media powerhouses, but others are on the rise. For example, NationalGeographic.com content cannot be pinned to Pinterest. As an avid “pinner” I have been disappointed frequently when I cannot pin a NationalGeographic.com piece. There are other popular social media sites National Geographic could take advantage of to spread their content far and wide throughout the World Wide Web.
Sydney Brianne Carter 