Deep Reading Is Not Just Found In Books

In "A Medium of the Most General Nature" Carr discusses how new technologies are impacting current media, as well as the users. The number of people relying on virtual entertainment and education, is high and growing. Carr writes "Media companies are reshaping their traditional products, even the physical ones, to more closely resemble what people experience when they're online" (94). Due to the large quantities of people turning to the internet, the different media are shifting their delivery and content in order to fit the new ways of the consumers.

Carr finds that the heavy reliance on the internet is detrimental to the users' ability to read and concentrate. Online experiences have users jumping from site to site, clicking on hyperlink after hyperlink. While, I do agree with Carr that the internet has tendencies to be distracting, I do not find his argument of the internet destroying reading skills to be sound. Whether or not people are reading electronically or the good ol' fashion way, people are still reading. I think that the internet is not harming reading skills, but helping them.

In Mary's post last week, I commented on how users are benefiting through online reading. I talked about how we aren't losing any reading or writing skills as technology advances. However, if we are losing skills, how important can they be than? The skills we are losing are because we aren't using them. I don't think that we are at a loss, but just adapting to the day and age. Steven Poole discusses this in his article "The Internet Isn't Harming Our Love of 'Deep Reading', It's Cultivating It." Poole writes, "Not many people in advanced industrial societies today, for example, grow up developing the mental skills required to kill tasty large mammals with a well-hurled spear."

Poole goes on to call out Carr, strongly refuting Carr's stance of the internet ruining deep reading. Poole gives the example of high sales for Young Adult blockbusters, as well as researchers who focus on finding out what young people like to do, in order to create captivating books that fit their interests. Siding with Poole, I do not think that reading is just skimming. Just like Carr mentions, "Many magazines have tweaked their layouts to mimic or at least echo the look and feel of Web sites" (94). Poole's article goes on to talk about how more and more lengthy pieces of writing are being found on the Web.

While both Carr and Poole make strong points, backed up with evidence, I completely agree with Poole. I do not think the internet is destroying reading. People are gaining new skills, not losing them. I think that users are adapting to new technologies, and some people are pessimistic and scared of this change.

Vooks, Shmooks - Group A

In the sixth chapter of the book, there were a few things that really stand out as Carr talks about the "Very Image of a Book". In one particular part, Carr speaks of books changing and how excited people are for the future of books. He also speaks of these "vooks" that embed videos within texts of books for a more visual and clear reading. I hope I am not being old school but I am not sold for a second that all these shenanigans is going to work.

Carr says that the book is changing and everyone is finding ways to improve reading. I read this and say to myself, "yeah i will stick to the ink". There is also the notion that old books just aren't cutting it anymore and this is where I strongly contest. I strongly believe books will never die. I also believe these "technology" books of all kinds won't last. I agree that kindles and such add a new dynamic but I do not see them surviving long term.

My support for this is simple and is actually mentioned in this chapter. People struggle to read and pixels are only making things worse. When you grab a book, you only have more pages to look at and if you want something else you need to literally separate yourself from the book. On a kindle, for example, your finger needs just a little strain to stray your reading to anything on the web. The argument against this is that there is no more "boring" reading and there are so many creative possibilities. Books are simple, books tell a story, and books were not meant to be changed. We know that innovations can dish aside a long lasting phenomenon similar to a book in the snap of the finger but I am not buying it.

In an article written on medium.com, there is a laundry list of reason the book will never die. I find two of these points to stand among the rest and were actually things I did not originally think of. First, books are autonomous. This is simply saying, you can be is Eastern Upper North Asia (obviously not a real place but somewhere in the middle of nowhere) and a book can be read. It is a luxury and comes as a whole. You can pick it up and put it down as you please no matter where you are. And second, the book is cheaper and has no hidden costs. In a world where price is everything, the "possibilities" of a kindle will not outweigh a price. You can live without a Kindle, because books don't have monthly fees. It may be a nice Christmas present, but realistically there is only a small group of extremely frequent readers that will really "save" from an e-book.

I don't know if I just don't like them or I really like books, but I don't see it happening. I wonder if any of you feel the same or have anything to support or contest my argument. I know, as far as reading goes, I don't want anyone messing with my ink no matter how creative or fun a book can become.

Group A: Carr Chapter 5

 The foundation of Nicholas Carr’s argument in chapter 5 of The Shallows is the assumption that the internet is a fundamental detriment to the reading process. Carr seems to suggest that the experience of consuming information on the internet is less valuable because of its tendency to be more concise and enable readers to jump between texts more easily than if they had to go look for a book in the non-virtual world. However, I disagree with Carr. I think that the same facets of the mediated reading experience that Carr denounces are beneficial to readers’ intelligence. While the internet should not be relied on as the sole source of information, the wealth of resources available via the web should not be discounted simply because Carr denotes them as “of the most general nature.”

            Carr’s biggest problem with the internet seems to be that it is “different” from reading a book in print. On page 91, he argues that the physical action of scrolling instead of clicking is harming our ability to engage with reading in a “multi-sensory” way. He supports the importance of “the crucial link between the sensory-motor experience of the materiality” that accompanies holding a book in your hand. However, what Carr is failing to recognize is that the internet has the capacity to engage our senses in unprecedented ways. A book can only offer us the visual stimulation of moving our eyes across the page and the motor stimulation of turning its pages. We can read about a subject on the internet, but also have the opportunity to listen to an interview clip of an expert speaking on that subject, or watch a video of the topic in question in action. The internet can engage us in the same ways as books, but has the potential to reach nearly every one of our senses in addition.

            While Carr reveres the printed text as the antithesis to the diversions that the online world can offer readers, books are not immune to the author’s dreaded fragmentation. Carr suggests that aspects of the internet experience such as hyperlinks and texts’ searchable qualities discourage readers from focusing on one text for very long. He frames this occurrence as a negative side effect of the internet, but I don’t think it is negative at all. The internet enables users to choose the information that is most relevant to their needs and guides them to their destination as well as sites that they may not have otherwise been likely to discover. While I do appreciate the value of following an author’s argument through its entire trajectory, I think it is an inefficient use of resources to read each book that you pick up from cover to cover. The internet not only enables readers to more easily access the specific information they need, but also promotes diversity of information by encouraging users to go to visit any number of websites. Carr argues that “the Net further fragments content and disrupts concentration,” but I think that it really just allows us more autonomy over what we are devoting our attention to.  

            Carr is adamant that the internet is negatively impacting our ability to read and concentrate. While I am not proposing that all of our information should be consumed via the internet, I think that he is dismissing the other perspective without acknowledging any of its benefits. Further, I think that Carr is ignoring the potential for the internet and traditional texts to successfully coexist. While I know that the internet is damaging the print industry, many (most?) people still recognize the value of having books in print. In terms of research and progress, I think that the internet enables us to advance more quickly because information is readily available to the public. The legwork that comprises the primary differences between virtual and print reading is irrelevant to the quality of reading itself, and I think that Carr is not acknowledging this viewpoint.

The good, the bad, and the internet

After reading chapter five, there are numerous things that stuck out to me. Some being how our society today has such a large need for speed when it comes to anything related to technology and the internet, second how much time we spend on the internet, and lastly how much the internet is integrated into other media facets. What is crazy is how all of these ideas are related but can all be good or bad. Carr makes some very interesting points throughout this section of the book and it is amazing how what he says has become increasingly truer in the present day.

When Carr discusses the idea that people in their 20s spend an average of 19 hours a week on the internet, I could not help but think about how that number has risen from when this book written (p 86). I feel like I am online 19 hours a day now, that is obviously not true, but I’m sure there are actually people out there that actually are. This article states that Americans spend 16 minutes out of every hour on a social media site. That is incredible to think about that over a quarter of every hour is wasted on simply social media, that is not even adding in email, texting, web surfing, or other facets on the web.  We talked about the idea previously this semester of the “always on” logic where people are constantly connected to the internet with smart phones and such. What is truly amazing is that when Carr wrote this book, it was notable even then that people’s usage on the web was extremely high. I think that the amount of time we spend online can be problematic to our society. 

I cannot help but wonder what Carr would say today when he sees the younger generations practically living off of their phones. So many simple skills are being lost because of the advent of technology being at your fingertips all the time. For instance the ability to read a map, or calculate tip, or simply remembering phone numbers are all struggles now for a lot of people because they rely on their phones instead of having this as common knowledge. Hence, reading this section really made me self-reflect and see how much I am online and how much I rely on my phone, and I found it very helpful and insightful.

Another portion of this reading that I found extremely interesting was the section where Carr discusses how TV shows are incorporating more web content on them.  As soon as I read the introduction to this topic on page ninety-five I immediately thought of Jimmy Fallon and then when I turned the page apparently Carr was thinking the same thing because he referenced the Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. I watch Jimmy Fallon every night on the Tonight Show and when he was on Late Show I would watch his show the next day online because of how late it was on. Jimmy Fallon really understands that in today’s society getting viewers is not all about getting people to watch at 11:35 pm, it is about getting followers on social media, having a huge fan base on YouTube, and realizing that clips that can be uploaded online can become more famous and add to his popularity rather than just trying to get traditional viewers. I constantly find myself watching his clips on his website or on YouTube and then sending them to friends or family. This constant spread of communication and online world is an advantage the Jimmy Fallon, as well as many other news and television outlets, see as an benefit in today’s world. Here is a clip that was just posted on the Late Night with Jimmy Fallon YouTube channel saying thank you for getting 3 million subscribers. This is just an example of how much the internet and simple binary code has changed our society and how we go about different things in our world today.

Overall, through both of these points in the book it is evident how the internet has changed our world. I think that this chapter of the book was very eye opening and showed how much the internet can consume us, but also how beneficial it is in other aspects. I cannot imagine my life without the internet anymore, and even though some things are drawbacks, I am happy with my life and all of the possibilities that are now imaginable because of technology and the internet.

The Ever Changing World of Reading- Group A

    For my section of The Shallows, I read the sixth chapter titled “The Very Image of a Book.” Earlier in the text, Nicholas Carr discusses how certain innovations, like the book, have changed us and our minds. He then discusses how even newer innovations change the ones he previously mentioned. For the purpose of this chapter, Carr explains how the book and reading have been changed. He brings up points about computers and devices like Amazon’s Kindle to get across just how much reading has been changed and how those inventions have changed our minds. Are these changes good or bad? We’ll find out.
    Carr brings up the positives of sticking to reading books off of the traditional pages rather than on a computer or tablet screen. Some of these positives include never having to worry about losing battery power of a book since it does not require one, words stamped on a page are easier to read than words on a screen, and there are less distractions. He then brings up the positives of reading off of a screen: lower costs of production of books which would result in lower costs of online books, tablet-like devices can hold hundreds of books, and they provide a wireless Internet connection which can allow readers to look up words or phrases of the book that they might not understand. Carr cites The Wall Street Journal’s L. Gordon Crovitz about just how important that final positive of reading from a screen is, “Easy-to-use, networked readers like the Kindle can help return to us our attention spans and extend what makes books great: words and their meaning” (Carr 102).
    Carr states very interesting reasons for each side. In my opinion, the compelling argument belongs to those in favor of reading off of a Kindle-like device based on it being an all-in-one device. “You can read digital newspapers and magazines, scan blogs, perform Google searches, listen to MP3s, and through a specially made browser, surf other Web sites” (Carr 101). Another component that adds into the all-in-one perks of the Kindle is that readers can connect the readings to their social media sites which helps satisfy the feeling of belonging that everybody desires. Being able to share parts of a book or one’s thoughts of a book can also promote books and raise their sales.
    People are always pessimistic when faced with change. Carr states that people did not think the book would survive the rise of the phonograph or the newspaper, but it did. Similarly, in “Is Kindle Burning the Book Industry,” Kaitlin Tambuscio says, “When the iPod was released, there was much controversy over the music industry and how devices such as this, and the ability to download illegally, could kill the music industry and hinder record sales” (Tambuscio). As popular as the iPod got, it did not kill the music industry. Whether it be the music industry or the book industry, it is clear that the people in power of major companies in these industries must adapt to our rapidly growing technological world so they do not get left behind.
    What does everyone think about books transitioning to our computer and tablet screens? For me personally, I have trouble reading off of a screen and can only read texts for a class if I print them out from my computer. However, I do understand and appreciate all of the positives that come from the transition. Do you guys think books on paper will be a thing of the past? Would you be able to only read books from a computer screen?

Let Me Google That For You - Mary Lobo (Group B)

I use Google to look up everything.  I look up important questions that I have about topics that I am learning about in school, I look up the age and histories of certain actors, and I even look up medical symptoms that I might be showing when I get a cold.  Whether I am on my laptop and quickly open up Google Chrome to do some searching or if I am on my cell phone and briefly pop open Safari, I nearly always have the Internet at my fingertips and I definitely use it.  Of course, sometimes looking everything up can backfire a bit.  Occasionally I will get too caught up reading Wikipedia articles or link-surfing by bouncing back and forth from article to article online and get distracted from the tasks that I should actually be completing.  By looking up symptoms to medical issues I almost always “diagnose” myself with some horrible disease when I simply have the sniffles.

I remember learning how to use Google all the way back in early elementary school.  For over a decade now my classmates and I have used Google for thousands of assignments and it is hard to imagine a world without it.  As Carr said, “The Net has become my all-purpose medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” (Carr, 6).  I find this particularly true.  Even things that I already know the answer to I find myself checking with Google just to make sure that I am correct.  There are even websites that make fun of people who dare to ask questions before going to Google for the answer. Let Me Google That For You is a website where, if someone asks you a question you can Google it and send them a link OF you Googling it.  It’s a reminder that no one even really has to speak to each other or use one another as sourced for information because all they have to do now is search for it online.  This article shows some of the many ways that Google has changed the world.

            The “Tools of the Mind” chapter of The Shallows, was very interesting.  Carr went into details about human development when it comes to tools such as drawing and the understanding boundaries and how clocks and time have changed over the years and how time is able to dictate life.  His says “Every technology is an expression of human will.  Through our tools, seek to expand our power and control over our circumstances – over nature.”  This is a particularly effective statement.  It makes me think that we as humans no longer leave anything to happen on its own anymore.  We are constantly forcing ourselves and the world around us to work around the technological constructs that we have put in place.  Humans created wristwatches that are now a constant reminder that our lives are strictly dictated by little ticks and tocks that humans are responsible for defining anyway.
            I think that Carr has made some interesting points so far and I am looking forward to reading more from him.  It is amazing to see exactly how much technology effects humans.  Sometimes I think that we don’t realize how broad of a category “technology” actually is and it isn’t until people like Carr bring up many of the ideas that we can fully comprehend it.  Technology is all around us and it controls nearly every aspect of our lives for better or for worse.

What will be your "Digital Adulthood?" -Nora Kornfeld, Blog Group B

     Something that struck me instantly when reading The Shallows was Carr's "Digital Adulthood." As soon as I read about his interpretation of this idea I couldn't help but wonder what we will consider our "Digital Adulthood" down the road. Now that we have access to so much information through new and developing technologies I can't help but wonder whats next. If our brains are already changing the way we read and interpret information because of technologies what's going to happen in the future?
    I have definitely seen changes in the way that I read and interpret in the past couple of years. Its not that I've become less interested in what I'm reading, I've become more distracted. I can never just sit down and read without interruptions. I am constantly checking my phone to see texts and to update myself on social media. Sometimes I even imagine my phone going off when it doesn't actually ring. I think the distraction factor is what has really hit me the most. Writing this blog, I think I've checked Facebook multiple times. Nothing changed between checking it once then another time moments later, but for some reason I felt the need to check it out. I'm also less inclined to read something if the print is small and its very long. Like we've talked about in class, new technologies, like the Internet have made us less capable of reading long articles when we can get the shortened version of it so easily. I can't help but wonder how my grandchildren will read. If my attention span is so bad already, I can only imagine how bad theirs will be.
     It's crazy to think that our brains work are actually changing. Now that information is so accessible we don't need to memorize phone numbers, addresses, and other useful information. There are few phone numbers in my contacts that I have memorized. I don't think its because my brain can't remember the information, I think its because it doesn't have to. Even teachers are embracing how accessible information is today, encouraging their students to think and not memorize.  My Econometrics class, my professor doesn't make us memorize formulas because in the real world a computer program can do the work for us or we can look up the information ourselves. In the context of my class I'm happy that I don't have to memorize formulas, but the bigger picture scares me a little bit. If I'm not committing information to memory, what will happen to my ability to remember? At this point in my life I think I have a pretty good memory, but ask me again in 30 years, who knows what I'll say. I might not even be able to remember what I can define as my "Digital Adulthood." That may be a little dramatic, but there's no denying that the way we read, interpret, and remember are all changing.
    How do you feel about memorizing formulas and definitions for classes? Do any of you feel similarly about the way you read and remember information as a result of new technologies?