Thad McIlroy on the Future of Publishing and Reading on Paper and Screens
Thad McIlroy, who runs a very good blog out of Vancouver called The Future of Publishing has kindly taken some time to answer my questions about the future of reading (on paper and on screens) and his answers are below in bold letters:1. Since reading on paper is very different from reading on screens,do you think that at some point we might need a new word in English for "reading on screens", yes or no?
I don't think that's very important. There's talk that there will soon be introduced into the vocabulary "Kindling a book." OK. Not thrilled with that phrase, but I'll get over it. "Reading on screens" is clear enough to me. If a term emerges, fine. But surely that's not the key issue here.
ZIPPY1300 Editor's note: "To kindle" is already an accepted very for reading on a Kindle. Many Kindle owners use this language already. See definition here at Urbandictionary.com
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kindle
ALSO: "screening" for reading on a screen, any kind of screen, Kindle screen, computer screen, PDA screen, iPhone screen, has also been accepted by the UrbanDictionary editors at Google HQ here:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=screening
2. If YES, can you suggest any possible words for this new word: maybe scanning? screen-reading? screening? any other words you can think of that might work well here, words or terms?
N/A
3. A futurist inthe USA , a very well known person, tells me: "Screening" is not a new term, but this might just be the time that it catches on, given the imminent arrival of Apple's iPad, and other devices. The last time I heard it -- screening -- in this way -- was back in the late 1990s when the RocketBook and Softbook made their
debut, but the term didn't do any better than the products did." do you agree with him that THIS might be the time SCREENING catches on, based on your 2008 academic paper? Yes or no or comments?
Well, consider also that "screening" already has several other usages: "'Screening' a film," "'Screening' a resume." Once again, if a term emerges that catches on, I'll be happy to use it, otherwise I'll stick with descriptive terms.
4. This fururist told me "This time around, screening is a clever and useful term capturing the fact that the experience reading on a screen is fundamentally different from reading on paper. Not a priori worse or better; just different."
Do you agree with him here, yes or no or comments?
I was thrilled that you alerted me to the work of Anne Mangen in Norway. Unfortunately the paper that you reference is still under online embargo, but I've asked my local library in Vancouver to obtain a copy. This led me also to numerous references to her work, and the case is compelling that reading onscreen IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT from reading in print. It so happens that I've been exploring this subject from various angles for my site www.thefutureofpublishing.com, and so your lead has been a godsend. The topic has received far too little coverage given the amount of academic research on the subject. I do intend to reveal as much of this as I can on my site in the near future.
5. This futurist also told me ..."So definitley SCREENING is the right word for the moment in terms of drawing people's attention to the vast literary shift about to wash over us....Do you agree that we are now witnessing a vast literary shift about to wash over us? YES NO MAYBE? COMMENTS?
I'm still not convinced that onscreen reading is "washing over us." The stats suggest otherwise. Many are contradictory of course. Some suggest that devices like the Kindle are bringing in new readers (certainly Amazon wants us to believe that), but most of the credible data I encounter indicates that this is more interesting if compared to the introduction of home video games. If you played them before it was at a bar or an arcade; now you can play them at home. In this case the video game industry has exploded. I haven't found any credible data to suggest that reading is exploding because of eBooks.
6. Is there any research yet that speaks about the way that different parts of the brain light up when people read on paper compared to when they read on a screen? Has anyone studied it this way yet? Can it be studied this way? Do you think it is possible that different parts of the brain light up when we read on paper vs reading on screens? Might PHD people do research on this in the future.? how could one conduct such research? with MRI machines? brain scans?
I'm not qualified to answer that as a professional, but I think that the very fine references on your site point to some of the answers.
7. Does reading on screens hamper or hinder our critical analysis skills of what we are reading?
I'm a great fan and follower of Jakob Nielsen and Don Norman at useit.com. They are usability experts with impeccable credentials. Based on their work and that of Anne Mangen I have to believe the answer is an unequivocal "YES"! I often quote Nielsen's remark from the 1990's. The question was: "How do people read on the Web?" The answer. "They don't." [check reference]. Nielsen points out how decidedly different people encounter text on a website versus printed material, and everyone should read this article to understand the essential difference.
8. If in the future most reading is done on screens, from computers to iPhones to Kindles to even textbooks on screens, could this hurt the critical thinking skills of young people to think, analyze and asess information?
Indeed. Of course there are many vocal proponents on each side of the argument. Here's an interesting site I found today prompted by your emails: http://www.zoneinproducts.com/
9. Do you think people will be reading on paper surfaces anymore in the year 2050? in the year 2099?
This is a fun topic to debate. On the one hand, who cares? They'll get what they want from where they want it, and no one knows today how many will want paper, screens, holography, or needles in the arm. But I do believe that the "book arts" will survive for a great long time, as they have much value to offer. I won't be here in 2050 or in 2099, but I hope I'm clutching a treasured text as I take my last breath.
10. Are you willing or ready to say goodbye to MR PAPER, and greet the SCREEN AGE with a complete open-minded welcome?
As with all technology, my philosophy is to observe, research and quantify. No one has appointed me as the arbiter of what technologies should be embraced in the future. My task on www.thefutureofpublishing.com is to observe and record all of the changes and influences that affect adoption of new technology, and offer reasonable prognoses as to where these might lead.
Thank you for your well-informed and provocative questions!
Best,
Thad
--
Thad McIlroy
The Future of Publishing, Inc.
www.TheFutureofPublishing.com
posted by dan at 11:11 PM
11 Comments:
@danny
What on earth is up with the typography on this blog?
It's impossible to read with full lines followed by partial lines.
I don't think I've ever seen a blog or a site with text laid out like this. It totally distracts from what you're writing about.
What's up?
Hi Richard
First of all, thanks for the note, and you are right.
2. i am the original computer dummie, but that's no excuse . i need to get my act together here. I fixed it now, i think.
3. you are right, and thanks for keeping me honest.
4. really
5 and email me offline at danbloom in the gmail dept sometime, i read your blog weekly....you are friend of Bill Hill, I know, he is great guru genius and my teacher in all this
6. can YOU, Richard, blog on this topic of screening vs reading one day, pro or con?
Danny@
i
think
i fixed
the
linebre
aks
no
w
The drive to invent new words for everyday activities that already have words for them has about as much chance of success as the drive for invented gender-neutral pronouns. Anyone who expects otherwise needs to get their head examined.
"Reading" is a useful word that means ....reading .....[reading type, reading handwriting, reading product labels, video screens, books, newspapers, clay tablets, tea leaves, pressure gauges, etc.].
"Screening" is less useful, and ambiguous; are we letting ideas into the brain, or sifting stuff out? Since "screening" has one meaning which is "to screen things out".
Are you sure you want to stick with ''screening'' here? Your project is a good one, but what the final word will be, who knows? Ask people for other suggestions for words.
How about "diging" -- for digital reading?
I would drop "screening" -- it has too many other multiple meanings and is too ambiguous and it sort of hints at "screening things out" and that is NOT what you want to say, I am sure.
Keep thinking, pal. This is a good national discussion you are moderating. But choose your words carefully, sir, and listen to everyone. Even David Pogue!
ANONYMOUS SAID THOSE WISE AND GOOD WORDS, ABOVE:
repeated here:
"Reading" is a useful word that means ....reading .....[reading type, reading handwriting, reading product labels, video screens, books, newspapers, clay tablets, tea leaves, pressure gauges, etc.].
"Screening" is less useful, and ambiguous; are we letting ideas into the brain, or sifting stuff out? Since "screening" has one meaning which is "to screen things out".
Are you sure you want to stick with ''screening'' here? Your project is a good one, but what the final word will be, who knows? Ask people for other suggestions for words.
How about "diging" -- for digital reading?
I would drop "screening" -- it has too many other multiple meanings and is too ambiguous and it sort of hints at "screening things out" and that is NOT what you want to say, I am sure.
Keep thinking, pal. This is a good national discussion you are moderating. But choose your words carefully, sir, and listen to everyone. Even David Pogue!
Examples of how "screening" is the wrong word for this issue:
1. the display of a motion picture
2. fabric of metal or plastic mesh
3. the act of concealing the existence of something by obstructing the view of it
4. testing objects or persons in order to identify those with particular characteristics
5. sifting out
6. examine in order to test suitability
A blogger on another site told me without holding anything back:
"Danny Boy,
The drive to invent new words for everyday activities that already have words for them has about as much chance of success as the drive for invented gender-neutral pronouns. Anyone who expects otherwise needs to get zir head examined."
I replied to him: Yo, thanks for your good note and feedback on this. I am not worried or even looking at chances of "success" on this. Just a national discussion. Successfully coming up with a new word for reading on screens is NOT what this is about. Not concerned with success. Concerned with people discussing the issues in public. For what it's worth. Maybe it aint worth nuttin' and I'm open to that, too.
The "drive" here -- I need to explain and make myself more clear -- is not to invent a new word. It's just to use a word like for example "screening" (since we read OFF OF screens....) in order to hopefully call attention, public attention, scholarly attention, to the huge differences between reading on paper and reading on screens, and what these differences might mean for the future of newspapers. That's all. No one is trying to invent or coin a new word. It just won't happen. And if a new word ever does come hopping down the information superhighway, it won't be "screening", I fully agree.
So what "might" be a better word for this? Any new suggestions, now that you understand my m.o. here?
Or, perhaps, there is no need for a new word for this. That could very well be the case. Both options are open.
I do my reading in the bath. I therefore am a sponge-bobber.
A newspaperman in NYC told me:
"Reading" is a useful word that means reading [type, handwriting, product labels, video screens, books, newspapers, clay tablets, tea leaves, pressure gauges, etc.]. "Screening" is less useful, and ambiguous; are we letting ideas into the brain, or sifting stuff out?
I replied to him:
"This, above, is very very good, what you said here. You are the first person in the world, to point out this thing about screening meaning SIFTING OUT, also, and when we read, of course, WE WANT TO LET IDEAS INTO OUR BRAIN..... NOT SIFT THEM OUT...so what you said and how said it.... is a very good argument about NOT using ''screening'' as my operative word here...GOOD GOOD POINT and thanks for this wake up call....I know all the other earlier meanings of ''screening'', and most people point out the ''movie screening'' concept, but you are the FIRST AND ONLY person SO FAR to point out the SIFTING OUT thing, and that is very important to take into consideration. thanks for this wake up call. Because we don't want this NEW WORD for reading on screens, if there ever IS a new word, to have anything to do with SIFTING THINGS OUT, screening things OUT, no no no.....screen-reading should MEAN taking things IN, taking information IN, you posted a very good and important comment, thanks."
DANNy
BY the way, someone asked me "About Thad McIlroy", who answered the questions above: On his website he notes:
"Writing and publishing are in my blood.
My father, Kim McIlroy, was an author, playwright and broadcaster. My great-uncle, Gordon Hill Grahame, was a novelist (his first novel, The Bond Triumphant, won Hodder and Stoughton's Canadian Prize Novel Contest in 1922). My great-great-great (etc.) uncle was Kenneth Grahame, author of the children's classic The Wind in the Willows (remember Toad of Toad Hall?). As writing did not always pay the bills, my father spent a chunk of his career working for Encyclopedia Britannica. I remember clearly the day the truck pulled up to our house and two uniformed men unloaded our first set of the Encyclopedia, along with the 52-volume Great Books of the Western World.
I graduated from high school, but didn't feel like heading straight to college, so instead I undertook a career as a bookseller. In 1977, part-time, I founded Virgo Press, a Toronto-based trade book publisher. In 1979 I co-founded Beatty & Church (with Steve Osborne of Vancouver's Pulp Press [now Arsenal Pulp Press]), a book distribution company, serving small presses in Canada, the U.S. and the U.K.
All of this was followed by a brief career in journalism, working for magazines, newspapers, radio and television.
In 1985 I edited and typeset what I still believe to be the first trade book published totally with desktop publishing technology, composed on a Macintosh (without a hard drive) with Microsoft Word (version 1.05!), and output to the first Apple LaserWriter (then costing nearly $10,000).
The book was called The Personal Letters of a Public Man: The Family Letters of John G. Diefenbaker (an intermittently popular Canadian politician and Prime Minister in the post-war era).
This led unexpectedly to an invitation to join a large graphic arts distribution company, McCutcheon Graphics (now Fujifilm Canada) as its first Desktop Publishing Product Manager. (I remember saying to John McCutcheon at my job interview, "But I really don't know anything about desktop publishing". He quickly replied, "No one else does either, so you might as well take the job!")
After three years at McCutcheon Graphics I decided to strike out on my own as a consultant, and decided shortly after that I'd have a better chance of success if I was based in Silicon Valley, rather than in Canada. I moved to San Francisco. As an electronic publishing analyst, consultant and author, I've spent my entire career exploring the technology and marketing issues surrounding electronic publishing, color imaging, PDF, workflow, publishing automation, and the Internet.
Along the way I've authored or edited a dozen books on these subjects, written some 200 articles, while delivering innumerable seminars on a broad range of industry-related topics. I also enjoyed the marvelous opportunity of working for five years as Program Director at Seybold Seminars.
In 1990 I co-founded (with Miles Southworth) The Color Resource, a publishing and distribution company devoted to books and training materials on color design, imaging and prepress.
More recently I wrote the Composition, Design, and Graphics chapter (with contributions from Frank Romano) for the Columbia Guide to Digital Publishing (Columbia University Press, January, 2003). I'm a contributing editor to PrintAction magazine, a columnist for XMLPitstop.com, and a member of the Technical Association of the Graphic Arts, the Association for Computing Machinery and the Content Management Professionals. For three consecutive years I was named one of Canada's 50 most influential people in graphic communications.
Well, that's more than enough about me. I just wanted people to know that I'm from a publishing background. It was my first passion. Trying to understand where publishing is headed is my new passion. Let's continue the journey...
Thad McIlroy"
Post a Comment
<< Home