the REAL differences between paper & screens

For my final blog post on this subject, I would like to discuss the REAL differences between paper and screens. What I mean by the “real” differences is a slightly more in-depth analysis from the mere statement that “one is physical, one is digital”.

In past blog posts, I have pondered over the reasons why E-book readers are the way they are, and what makes one more successful and appealing to consumers over the other. The result is always the same: the closer the resemblance to a physical book, the more comfortable the consumer is and therefore the more successful the digital reader is. So what makes physical paper a higher preference than digital E-books and all the conveniences that come with them?

An article I recently read entitled “Ebook - the Missing Link between Paper and Screen” by Birgit Lemken attempts to investigate the real differences and details of each literary medium. One key feature of print on paper, as also previously described in prior posts, is its ability to annotate notes and statements in margins. While more recent word processing software has made this a possibility for digital print, it is not frequently used and is considered a tedious task by many. However, the Lemken article augments this notion by pointing out that marginal notes are only apart of a broader scheme that links physical paper text to social relationships. Lemken reminds us that the final result of a digital word processed document is almost always a piece of paper that is printed out. The reason behind this is because “Paper documents have as well some social connotations. Exchanging print outs for review, collaborative modifying and personal delivery of documents can be used to foster social contacts and relations” (Lemken). This assessment illustrates one feature of paper as a shared, social medium which may be difficult for digital e-books to transcend.

Page turning is another surprisingly valuable feature to books and physical text. Studies cited by Lemken show us that there is something inherit within digital text restricts our attention spans as human beings. “We use paper to acquire, provide and modify information. Spatial location, time sequence, frequency of occurrence and word meaning are automatically encoded into memory [HZ79]. As automatic processes they only need minimal energy from our limited-capacity attentional mechanisms. This incidental memory can be effective as a mnemonic device [Roth71]. Lovelace and Southall showed that content recall was reduced by scrolled text presentation [LS83], the most frequent mode on computer screens” (Lemken). This assessment displays how page turning, over continuous scrolling, is preferable for our short term memory and is actually easier to read.

Another contribution to a weakened attention span in screen reading comes from the concept of hyperlinks. Hyperlinks allow readers to jump to a subtext subject within the primary body of work while in the middle of reading. This restricts our attention spans because it enables us to abandon the current reading project at any time and to simply “get lost in cyberspace” with no real direction or end. Hyperlinks can result in endless jumping and prohibit true chronological order that has proven to be essential in literary history.

e book piracy

Today I came across an interesting blurb in the new york times blogging section about electronic gadgets and the like. This blog post, published/posted on April 8th, describes how some Amazon Kindle users and customers are upset with the price of some of the E-books they offer. The article can be found HERE They are so upset, infact, that they have begun to publicly threaten Amazon with a potential wave of digital piracy.

Upset kindle users are beginning to voice a public outcry pertaining to digital ebooks being priced over $10. These users feel this price is extremely rash and unwarranted due to the comparison in price to an actual book. These users do not feel that it is fair for an ebook to be priced at $10 when the physical copy of the book may be priced at $15. The upset Amazon customers' complaints is that this is not a proper proportion of pricing considering the substantially less capabilities of a digital book in comparison to a hardbound, physical one.

The amazon users merely declare that if Amazon does not reconsider its pricing model, then they will dedicate themselves to the illegal replication and online distribution of these ebooks. Their plan is to do for digital books what MP3s did for digital music.

This proposes an interesting question. What is the actual numerical value/worth of possessing physical media over digital media? One of the primary arguments coming from the disgruntled Amazon customers is that a physical book can be shared, unlike the digital E-book. This really presents itsself as a justified argument to me. With a physical book, you pay a single price for it, but all friends and family of the purchasser will be able to read it as well, providing it has been loaned out to them. This implies that a single purchase is equal to an infinite number of reading experiences (of the same book of course). Is it really fair for a book to charge 2/3of the price even though its readership restriction goes from infinite to just one?

To take a break from the aggressive, competing forces of the E-book market, today I suggest an investigation of digital literature itself and what it truly means. The progression of digital literature does seem to be progressing towards many similar paths to physical books themselves as the e-book readers attempt to mimic actual books in order to appeal to consumers. However, the concept of digital literature still stands to trigger a new revolution as to what a book actually is and how readers approach the process of reading.

For example, while physical books do stand an opportunity for readers to interact with their text through marginal notes, footnotes, and such; they pale in comparison to the potential interactivity that could come from a new revolution of digital literature. What specifically is meant by this? I think one of the primary foundations to this new revolution of interactivity in literature lies in the ability to hyperlink. The internet itself is governed by hyperlinks which allow users to jump from one piece of information to another. What if books themselves had hyperlinks within them that allowed users to simply jump to an explanation of something that they did not initially understand? Say for example you were reading the classic novel Lord of the Flies and you did not have a firm understanding of what a conch shell was. To truly grasp the concept, you could simply link yourself, in the middle of reading the novel, to a picture and explanation of conch shells.

This sounds like an extremely helpful and convenient feature, however, scholars debate whether this is actually a good thing for literature as a whole. Considering the ability to suddenly jump from one place to the next at any given time amidst reading, it is very likely that readers’ attention spans would drastically decrease. This would make extended, more complex and in depth literature far more difficult for the average reader to pay attention to in an age of hyperlinks.

Hyperlinks do not just stand potential to link readers to extended explanations but also to link to other parts of the text they are reading. Reading could become an extremely active process in which the reader decides on the chronology to which a piece of text progresses. An article entitled “PRIDE AND PREJUDICE ABOUT ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING” published in the Christian Science Monitor describes one of the first hyperlink stories. “One of the first hypertext novels to gain prominence was a 1992 work called "Afternoon, a Story." Author Michael Joyce writes about Peter, who on his way home from work sees the aftermath of a car wreck and suspects it involves his wife and son. The reader can choose to move in disjointed fashion through the story screen by screen. But at the "end," it's not clear what has happened to the mother and child. If readers click on various key words in the text, they can pick alternative routes that yield additional clues and context for other characters in the story.”
While interactivity itself may be the revolution of reading itself, its obvious that it offers many negative consequences like the destruction of permanent literature and the decrease of attention spans within its readers.

Sony & Google. A Worthy Adversary?

Since I have returned from my epic spring break trip to Barcelona and rejoined the news buzz around the Kindle, electronic literature, and the like. What I have discovered is that real competition that opposes Amazon’s current control of this specific market has officially stepped up.

In my previous post to this blog, I noted that Amazon was finally seeing some competition in terms of hardware gadgets (coming from the iriver company) and also seeing some competition in terms of the grander scheme of the e-book market (coming from big time book sellers Barnes & Noble). However, neither of these really posed a solid threat to Amazon. The Kindle 2 is by far the predominant e-book reader and Barnes and Nobles recent acquisition of smalltime e-book provider Fictionwise only added about 50k e-books to their library (peanuts in comparison to Amazon’s library which is over five times the size).

However, old rival Sony and their Reader product were recently backed by everyone’s favorite corporation: Google. The idea of Google entering the fray even sounds intimidating and Amazon might have a reason to be slightly worried. The new partnership between Sony and Google can be further analyzed at a New York Times article found HERE.

Yet, as the article mentions Amazon’s executives aren’t too worried because the books Google is providing to Sony’s catalogue are merely old books in which copyright licenses have expired. This library would include classics by Mark Twain for example but certainly wouldn’t provide books available on the current New York Times best sellers list. While the article is a little vague, it is my understanding that what Google is providing to Sony is actually their Google books section of their website, which is certainly a vast catalogue despite the fact it only provides full versions of books which have outdated copyright licenses.

The reason why I think Google stands so much potential is its open, “E-pub” format for providing e-books. This format is one that would make books extremely accessible and easy to digitally manage. This format alone could quite simply be appealing enough to consumers to make them the favored e-book provider over Amazon and its Kindle. This would also progress the concept of e-books to an MP3 like system of books, which are very easy to manage, send, transfer, etc. This format is undoubtedly more user friendly and less controlling than the current format provided by Amazon which seems to merely mimic a book store in digital form.

All in all, while I don’t believe that Amazon should be extremely intimidated just yet, Google is certainly a force to be reckoned with and certainly stands lots of potential to become a much more predominant player in this race to be leader of the e-book market. While its library primarily consists of older literature at the time, the moment it breaks through into the best sellers market and the like, it could easily launch Sony forward to take the reigns of the E-book market.

Race for the E-Book Market

Two New York Times articles caught my interest recently. While most news on the subject of digital literature usually focuses on E-book reading gadgets and hardware like Amazon’s “Kindle” and Sony’s “Reader”, these articles focused on the E-book market itself its potential suppliers. This of course is because most companies have approached the emerging market of digital literature by competing to create the dominant e-book reader that will win over consumers’ hearts. However, despite the fact that Amazon and its Kindle appear to lead this market, the company may be shifting gears and targeting the E-book market itself and its provision.

The biggest sign of this new focus comes from a New York Times article entitled “Amazon to Sell E-Books for Apple Devices” which was written by Brad Stone and published on March 4th, 2009. The article can be found HERE. This article describes Amazon’s recent move to supply E-books to other multimedia devices, primarily the popular Apple I-Phone, as a key indicator to the company’s newfound interest in becoming the top E-book provider. It certainly doesn’t hurt that Amazon has about 240,000 E-books for sale on Amazon.com, as reminded by the Times article.

One might ask why? Why would the company who has almost cornered the market on E-book readers and hardware suddenly shift their attention and potentially lose the Kindle’s role as top dog? I think one of the answers is fairly obvious. Being the key provider of E-books would certainly make Amazon the central player within the entire digital literature market. However, I think another important reason lies in the emerging competition from other companies. In the very near future it is inevitable that other companies will design and develop their own take on the E-Book reader. In fact, some already have and many of them stand potential to be more appealing to consumers due to their convergence with other multimedia. Iriver, for example has started some buzz over their new multimedia gadget called the “Libre”. The Libre is basically an E-book reader that also functions as an MP3 player and is expected to be a decent product due to iriver’s solid reputation. The most appealing part of the anticipated Libre is its convenient ability to read PDF text files, which are widely used amongst users today.. The Libre can be viewed HERE.

Lastly, I think the final key reason that Amazon aspires to be the primary provider of E-books is because they stand a very good chance to do for e-books what I-Tunes does for digital music. Yet there does appear to be a minor threat to Amazon’s potential conquest of the E-book market. Another New York Times article found HERE describes Barnes and Nobles recent acquisition of a fair sized, online e-book retailer. This spontaneous stock of e-book content placed Barnes Noble into play with the race to dominate the E-book market. However, what I found most significant about this article was the fact that Fictionwise (the recently acquired company by Barnes and Noble) “currently stocks 59,791 titles, according to a “stats” chart on its home page, and its prices are regularly more expensive than those sold on Amazon.com.” I think that the combination of Amazon’s substantially cheaper prices ($28 from B&N, $10 from Amazon) and their vastly more extensive library gives them a significant enough lead over competitors.

That is why I believe Amazon is redirecting their primary attention. If they continue in this manner they can crush competitors like B&N before they pose too much of a threat.

Kindle 2 !

So it appears that Amazon has initiated the next step in the digital book revolution by enhancing and evolving their Kindle product into the “Kindle 2”. A New York Times article, published today 2/24/09 entitled “The Kindle: Good Before, Better Now”, gives a fairly detailed evaluation of the product, its changes, and new features. At times the article appears to provide more of a raving advertising service to Amazon, but it is also pretty informative as to what has changed within the product.


Will Amazon’s upgrade attempts be in vain? Or will their second take on the Kindle spark a digital literature revolution for good?

This article can be found here, at the following URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/technology/personaltech/24pogue.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=kindle&st=cse

Judging by the pictures on the New York Times’ article, the first thing that really pops out to the consumer about the enhanced Kindle 2 is its new, sleek interface. The new look is definitely eye catching and appealing from the get go. Yet, the article suggests that this was done in an attempt to mimic apple’s appearance which has obviously been successful in the past. I would say this is a pretty accurate assessment of Amazon’s attempt to draw in more consumers to the product; the Kindle looks like it could easily have been manufactured by Steve Jobs himself.

However, the majority of the Kindle 2’s new features do not just revolve around appearance. It appears that Amazon’s idea of what truly enhances their product is its ability to simulate the feel of reading a real, physical book. This really does give me the impression that the concept of digital literature will breakthrough only after a proper meld of physical readership and digital convenience takes place. The New York Times emphasizes the product’s lack of screen illumination, battery consumption, glare, and eyestrain to make the reader/consumer feel more familiar with the Kindle as if it weren’t a screen to read from, but rather more like an actual book. The Kindle has been upgraded to further extend its reach towards physical books in other ways. The E-Ink feature, although not a new feature to the Kindle, comforts the user with its striking similarity to print ink found in physical books.

As previously stated, the Kindle is attempting to combine the comforting features of old, traditional books with the convenience that new, digital e-books have to offer. One of the more intriguing, convenient features the Kindle 2 has to offer is its free Wi-fi capability. Another feature that appears to rival with the I-Phone, the Kindle is able to connect to the internet and download books from anywhere. The best part? Its free, unlike I-Phone broadband service. The Kindle is also equipped with a useful web browser to optimize its convenience.

In the end, the Kindle 2 appears to be an extremely handy e-book reader that has many other convenient features to offer. If any product has the ability, or at least the momentum, to start an e-book revolution, the Kindle is it.

Digital Literacy - Young Children Growing Up Digitally Competent

For my first E-Ink blog post on the digital presentation of the written word I am going to discuss the concepts revolving around digital education of the next generation of students.

It is pretty clear that American culture is progressing towards a new, modern epoc of screen culture. This era will reflect a time period in which a basic level of digital competence will be necessary in order to properly obtain information and remain competitive in job markets and the like.
I read the following article from the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/books/16libr.html?scp=2&sq=librarians&st=cse) last week entitled "In Web Age, Library Job Gets Update" and found it to be very interesting, mainly because it seems to support the notions that a digital culture which includes digital literacy does diminish our general attention spans and capability to remain engaged in reading, yet encourage reading at the same time

However, the main focus of the article is a librarian’s efforts to get a younger generation to read through methods of digital education. These methods include internet research education and lessons on PowerPoint and media creation. The article frequently gave the impression that children, who often resist the efforts of their teachers to get them to read, are more likely to become engaged in reading if it takes some digital form like interactive online encyclopedias. This is quite possible due to this younger generation’s early exposure to digital media that previous generations had not.

It is interesting to see that this how the role of the librarian has begun to evolve into the role of “information literacy teacher”, as described by the article. This role of information literacy teacher prepares students to properly utilize the internet and its vast, complex array of digital multimedia that comes with it

In the end, this article shows us that digital literacy may be the only way to keep students engaged in reading. While this may not be as great as reading actual physical books and magazines, it is still the fact that young students are reading which is most important.

However, will this preference of digital literature in young students cause an endless cycle of attention deprivation? Or will the interactive nature of digital literature increase readership in our youth? Only the future will tell.