Arch wrote:

but do any of you agree that written
words might sometimes better inform and entertain than pics and
videos?

Oh yes. Without doubt. While I might snicker at a picture, or say
"so... that's what that looks like" or something along those lines, it
is certainly not the same as we written verbage.

I can read and completely enjoy Ambrose Bierce at just about any given
time, and enjoy it each time I read anything he wrote.

The same with Samuel Clemens (aka mark Twain) of which I have read
steadily since I was a nipper. As I grew older, my appreciation of his
work grew as I understood there was something more to them than just a
good yarn.

Pictures give a snapshot of a scene, and can sometimes help put things
into a perspective that the mind alone cannot by reading descriptive
text. You can read that a thousand houses were under water from
Katrina, but to see a picture of only rooftops and floating cars for
miles brings perspective.

A picture of a flooded house with watermarks showing how high the water
actually was will impress and may cause personal reflection on how hard
it must be for those that called that house home.

But well written text that tells the story of the people that lived
there and how it impacted them personally, and how it affects their
lives in the long term really tells the story.

I think both pictures and text have their place, each lends itself to a
different purpose. I get significantly more pleasure from reading a
well written, sometimes clever piece of work than I do simply looking
picture.

Robert