This article http://www.useit.com/papers/webwriting/writing.html discusses the "proper" way to write for the web, making the point that writing should be "concise" and "scannable." The researchers found that web users rarely "read" the content of a website: They search for information.
Are you really reading this? Just curious; the writers don't mention anything about blogs.
So of course, being the mild cynic of the internet that I am, I immediately extrapolated long-term implications of this phenomenon. As society moves forward and children begin to use computers and the internet as early as 4 or 5 years of age, will "internet reading" become detrimental to their ability to read texts and novels at a later age? Also, will becoming increasingly familiar with "internet writing" have a profoundly negative impact on students' writing skills (specifically in terms of their creative writing)?
What might the future hold, then? Here's a possibility:
First, the internet will usher in an entirely new era of communication, one that we are only now beginning to realize. People will become so comfortable with and reliant upon short quips of information that much longer pieces of writing, either internet-based or not, will become antiquated relics. While the beauty of language will be lost, people will be more apt to be more knowledgeable about a wider array of subjects than ever before. Deeper understandings needn't be reached; basic information will suffice. Novels which explore elements of the human condition will become 15-slide, graphics-based PowerPoints accessible on each publishing house's website. Political propaganda will move from primarily spoken and written appeals to primarily visual elements that Democrats and Republicans alike can download on their iPods and share with their friends. Our world will be one that seeks facts, not truths.
Or maybe I'm wrong. If we, as teachers, take on the task of explaining writing and reading in different contexts -- as we have done for centuries -- internet writing may just be another creative, effective way for people to express themselves. We have to commit to the idea that the internet is an entirely different manner of communicating and understand that humans have been searching for new ways to communicate since our vocal chords could emit only grunts and cave walls yielded the first cross-generationally transmittable stories. Man certainly could not communicate the same manner of ideas with smoke signals as he could with paper and pen. The audiences and the tools are intrinsically different and produce intrinsically different results. So, too, is it with computers and the internet.
It is easy to take one form of writing or reading in one context and transfer it (incorrectly so) to every other context of writing and reading. That is the truth that many students have perenially failed to understand, but one that a spider in a book about a pig did understand. Sometimes, in some contexts, short and to-the-point is the way to go. It just isn't the way to go all the time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It's been a long time since I've read Charlotte's Web. Maybe I'll go "scan" an online summary! ;)
I had several thoughts while reading your "extrapolation." First, that it had connections to the readings for this week on emotion and design. Although I have only "scanned" these readings, I was struck by a statement in the intro, "Aesthetics matter: attractive things work better." As it applies to writing for the web, I think perhaps the "concise" and "scannable" are part of a larger design issue. Are you more likely to read further or in more detail a page that is well-designed or one that is a mess? I do however, agree with you that, as was stated in your original article, "waiting is unpleasant" and we are wired to want everything faster and easier.
I also kept thinking about connections to a book I am reading as part of my inquiry project-Laptops and Literacy by Mark Warschauer. As a Spanish teacher I haven't spent a lot of time exploring "literacy" issues in depth. This book offers a wealth of information and implications for technology use. For example he speaks about the difference between academic and digital literacies and concludes that "certain types of digital literacy overlap strongly with scholarly goals and purposes...this is particularly true of tasks related to finding, evaluating, and using online sources of information." (Warschauer, 2006) He goes on to point out that "other types of digital literacy practices, such as instant messaging, are viewed by many as less relevant or even contradictory tothe mastery of academic literacy..." ( Warschauer, 2006).
He really has a lot of very interesting things to say related to "literacy" and has chapters dedicated to reading and writing. I keep thinking of you as I read it.
One of the joys of the internet is the immediacy of results. I know I tend to think "quickly" when using the computer. I've even noticed that I tend to read documents faster (perhaps at a "scanning" pace) when they are on the computer. If, on the other hand, I print them out, I can go to my quiet space and emerse myself into the material. Am I the only one?
We think of the internet as instant access to so many outlets that I do believe our brains function in a different manner. When it comes to the future of our little ones, I hope they will recognize the difference between in-hand text and computer-delivered information. No matter how wonderful technology is, students still need to sit down with a good book, cuddle up, and get lost in thoughts. Personally, I think some of the joy gets lost sitting in front of the computer.
Post a Comment