Writing is, of course, one of the most important means of communication. We learn and understand things through reading. Today we are reading more and more words online, as opposed to reading paper documents, although I’m not sure if online writing is now read more often than print.
For many years books and journals were a significant way that we learned about the world, although each book was an unconnected island which could passively list references and further sources of information, but couldn’t take you there with a simple action. Books also had an inherent value because they were something you could own. Scarcity could also increase the value of a book.
Here are some thoughts from three experienced journalists on digital vs. physical books, plus another thought from myself at the end.
Scott Karp wonders if the ability to read online and follow topics via hyperlink instead of focusing on one document at a time is actually changing the way we think.
Matthew Ingram opines that the links within on-line writing provide a dynamic and customizable knowledge acquisition process, where you can examine multiple pieces of information from different sources, that can only be matched by a group conversation (although I suspect he’s emphasizing the social interaction here… :) )
Evan Schnittman enjoys the convenience of the Ebook when he can’t get access to books or when it’s inconvenient to travel with them, but interestingly, he also mentions that he won’t own both digital and physical copies of the same book if he has to pay for both.
As a comic book (and book) collector, I find this last part interesting. Digital media are essentially cloned copies that are indistinguishable from each other. To a certain extent, the same holds true for mass-produced books… until you annotate it yourself or get it autographed by the author.
Do digital media have the potential to change how we process information, but also some of our norms or values about ownership?
