What should we call digital reading?
Do we need a different word for reading digitally online as opposed to reading a paper book? If so, what should the term be, and who or what should determine that term? Already there are different words floating about to distinguish between digital reading and traditional paper reading.
Studies are currently underway to look at the act of reading digitally. Dr. Richard Cunningham at Arcadia University is part of one such study:
An international team of researchers led by University of Victoria’s Canada Research Chair in Humanities Computing, Ray Siemens that will be studying digital reading. The team will be looking at the issue . . . what will the act of reading look like in the future and what can we learn from the past to ensure digital applications enhance and expand the reading experience? . . .over the next seven years through participation in the Implementing New Knowledge Environments (INKE) project.
Research will only carry you so far before popular culture steps in and takes a swipe at academia. Dan Bloom, an American blogger in Taiwan is avidly interested in what word will emerge the winner in the pop culture wars. That led to the following interview:
Question: Many pundits are saying fewer people are reading. Are fewer people reading off line materials but more people reading online materials?
Bloom: I agree that fewer people are reading on paper, but more are reading on screens. People are still reading like crazy, all over the world, and the computer revolution has created more and more readers. But they are not reading on paper as much as they used to, and they are reading on screens much much more. So we might need a new word to define this new kind of reading — and to differentiate it from the old kind of reading we used to on paper surfaces.
Question: Isn’t reading a process whether you are reading online or reading a physical book?
Bloom: Yes, reading is reading, whether we are reading on a paper surface or online or on a Kindle or PDA screen. Yes, reading is reading. But the emotional and intellectual process of reading on paper is vastly different from reading text on a computer screen. We call both activities “reading”, but I feel that since reading on a paper surface is so different from reading on a screen, both in how we “read” and what we retain in the reading process, that we need a new word or term for the kind of reading we do online now. I have suggested the term “screening”, just to get the global discussion started. Others have suggested words like “diging” (for digital reading), scanning, browsing, perusing, even screading and scranning.
Question: Where did the idea of “screening come from?
Bloom: I read an article in Scientific American about Dr Anne Mangen of Norway who has been doing pioneering work in the field of reading and reading online, and it was her idea that reading online is fundamentally different from reading on paper that got me to thinking.
I wondered: what should this new word be to describe reading on a screen. So “screening” popped into my head. There are many other words that will do just as well, and in the end, the culture will decide which word is finally chosen. I am sure it won’t be “screening”. I am not married to the word “screening”. But I am sure a new word will emerge. I just want people to think about this and come up with better words.
Question: Wouldn’t e-reading be more appropriate than screening?
Bloom: E-reading is a very good word! I never thought of that term before. In
fact, that is a very good term for what I am talking about. Since we already have the term “e-reader” and “e-reading device”, then maybe this word you suggest –
“e-reading” — is perfect. I agree. That is a great idea. I think that in the near future, one word will stick. I have no idea which word that will be. My main thrust now is to ask people to think about what this word for reading online might be, and which word they favor.
Question: If you read a book on a handheld device, is that still screening?
Bloom: Yes, to my new way of thinking, reading any text on a screen is “screening”. So reading a book on a Kindle is also screening. But some Kindle owners now refer to reading a book on the device as “kindling”, so a new verb for reading on a Kindle has already evolved. Google that term and you will see. People have been using “kindling” as a verb — for reading on a Kindle e-reader — for over two years already.
Question: New technologies are emerging like Wattpad that allow cloud reading. Would that also fall into the “screening” arena?
Bloom: Yes, I am familiar with Wattpad. In fact, I published a commentary about screening on Wattpad last month. Cloud reading would be screening, too. In my opinion, “reading’ should only be used now for reading on paper surfaces. All reading on screens should be called “screening”. Or whatever word or term emerges after many people join the discussion. My role in all this has just been to get a worldwide discussion going, and my inspiration for this is the work of Dr. Anne Mangen[associate professor National Centre for Reading Research and Education University of Stavanger] in Norway. She has heard about my suggestion of the word “screening”, and while she does not agree with me completely, she does think it’s a good start, to get the discussion going.
Here is Dr. Mangen’s actual response to Mr.. Bloom, that he provided for this interview:
My first impression is that the term *****”screening” is adequate in some respects, but *****not in others. It’s adequate to the extent that it points to certain differences in the reading mode which has to do with the display nature, the central *****bias of a screen compared to a page of print text (our gaze is *****naturally oriented towards the center), and the image-like character of modalities (we ******tend to read a screen spatially, in *****contrast to the page which we linearly). It is not adequate insofar as it does not discriminate between different kinds of screening – we can also screen a print text (scan, filter, skim etc.), and we perceive different kinds of screens differently (compare the TV with the cell phone, the e-book with the laptop).
Whatever word does get adopted by the masses, it will indeed describe something different from reading traditional books, magazines and newspapers. Exactly how different reading is on a computer, ebook reader, or phone, is still being determined by researchers.
Related Posts:
May 7th, 2009
Smitjha, a reader in India, tells me today re this interview:
“very interesting Dan. i have often felt i suffer not being able to read(or should i say screen) long pieces… for example the ebook you sent me last week… i did screen through the first few chapters, but since most of my day is spent in front of the screen at work, i try not to look at the screen when i am back home and am unable to finish that!
also, i still prefer reading from paper much more. very old fashioned aye, but its not as straining to the eye and is infinitely more personal.
but from now on when i am talking of an ebook, i am going to tell my friends to screen it!
:)
smitha
May 7th, 2009
After months of trying to interest the US media in this story, Susan Wilson took me up on my offer to a quiet email interview. She did it. Now the Internet is on fire with these ideas presented here for the first time. A top editor at a major magazine on the East Coast told me: “Oh my God. You’ve actually got someone to cover this. You are completely amazing, Danny. Hats off to you.”
May 7th, 2009
Now let’s get John Markoff, David Pogue, Brad Stone, James Fallows, Jason Pontin and others involved in this discussion, including Brian Stelter, Bruce Headlam and Jennifer 8. Lee at the New York Times. Maybe David Shipley at the NY Times oped page? Maybe Margaret Pritchard the oped page at the Boston Globe before it goes under? Maybe someone at Wired, like Alexis Madrigal or Dylan Tweeney? Certainly, this idea deserves print attention, as well as screen attention, too. But who will go first? Bravo to Susan Wilson and TechBlorge for being the first to dip their toes into these waters……
May 7th, 2009
Fantastic, Dan. I’m going to link to this on Dogmatika’s Twitter.
Susan, editor of
http://www.dogmatika.com
May 7th, 2009
”this is interesting, danny… that’s what happens when you take time to think and wonder… just told a bunch of highschool kids that was the most important thing they could do…”
Steve in Toronto, Canada
science writer
May 7th, 2009
Scientifically speaking, there may be a difference in the mind’s experience of reading paper and reading a screen. Pointedly, I assume it deals largely with the introduction of tactile response to paper reading (flipping pages, for instance). Reading a screen causes the brain to be more involved in managing the eye’s focus – there’s a greater intensity of light being emitted directly at the eye and a refresh rate that is imperceptible to our consciousness. However, I would wager that the chief difference between digital material and printed material will be in the future capitalization of the presentation. Digital print has the opportunity to be what the periodical was to the novel. The introduction of ‘distractions’ to the reader will be the unfortunate future of digital publications. Publishers will seek advertising dollars to offset the price of developing an eBook technological infrastructure, while maintaining reduced prices to the consumer. This, in turn, will result in a future generation similar to what is known today as the ‘MTV Generation.’ A generation of people that adapt to the continual bombardment of outside distractions in contest with focused attention. Adult ADD won’t be a condition, but a state of being.
In any case, today’s eBook is still very immature in its developement and has not yet separated itself from the legacy of printed material. We are still using printed text as the basis for the eBook, as opposed to the eBook redefining its own evolution. To name the process of consuming this medium would only result in the subconscious segregation of those that “read” and those that “screen” (to use your term). I do far more listening of audiobooks today, and I continue to say that I’m “reading” a book. Given a multitude of methods for consuming material can only enhance the comprehension that an individual can gain, but people cannot accept this and have a feeling of elitism for their choices.
May 7th, 2009
It’s a interesting topic since I have a class today discussed about Amazon.com including kindle and somehow, another e-book called FLEPia produced by Fujitsu (http://blog.udn.com/ivorwang/2772955). Well, I havn’t really thought about what to call it properly, though it quite a significant process in teqh nowadays. I receive news, vedios, every different pecies online so i won’t need to pay a cent and its prompt ability sent me always high-variaty things that sometimes not in my expectation(just like this article). I’ll happy to see someday we can only carry the FLEPia paper-thing which holds thousands books in there just like the capacity of iPad we’ve never thought 10yrs before. Anyway, it saves the trees, save the earth! Right?
May 7th, 2009
*pieces
May 7th, 2009
A top writer at the Boston Globe told me today, after following this discussion for several months now,
“Dear Danny,
some day i may write abt that … it’s interesting ”
- A.
May 7th, 2009
Said a top editor at MIT:
“Oh my God. You’ve actually got someone to cover this.
You are completely amazing. Hats off to you.”
– J.
May 7th, 2009
About BLORGE
We serve the global IT community.
Our mission is to provide gutsy, honest and informed coverage and comment on key technology news and issues, without fear or favor.
We want to inform, stimulate and entertain our readers. We want to a fresh, independent perspective.
Our motto is “technology with attitude”
A team of experienced writers from around the world work to bring you fresh news every day.
May 7th, 2009
What a bizarre discussion, but now that you mention it, yes, reading online is different to reading a newspaper. But, reading a newspaper is different to reading a book, or a timetable, and we don’t need words to describe those different types of reading, so perhaps “I read it online” is all that’s needed. Don’t we already have too many faddish words in the English language.
May 7th, 2009
Nothing like a discussion about a concept with inbred congratulations back and forth.
It’s reading. If you get a kindle type machine down around $50 US and offer books and periodicals at a price point reflecting the savings of eliminating physical printing it will be a runaway success with curmudgeons and mass market book retails complaining.
A consistent, standard interface, a college textbook sized reading area and you can toss large print and audio books on the same file.
iTunes for books. Authors can insert hyperlinks for depth and perspective, movies and the original material it was based on could be included.
Think about DVD and the enhancements it has over VHS tapes.
I prefer material to be electronic. It offers many advantages. Reading isn’t different on electronic media, the presentation is different.
Most of it is locked down in a particular mode because of the early limitations of speed and the cost storage.
May 8th, 2009
A friend professor at Rutgers disagrees with me:
“Very funny…. shall I not say I read your interview unless I printed it out and read it on paper, Danny?”
He especially disagreed with this quote:
“In my opinion, ‘reading’ should only be used now for reading on paper surfaces. All reading on screens should be called ‘screening’.”
COOL: all i want to do is get a discussion going pro and con, and so far all the comments are good.
May 8th, 2009
Online v. print reading: which one makes us smarter?
By Coco Ballantyne
It’s no mystery that publications have been taking a beating as more and more people read their news on the Net. But there’s a catch. The online info may be instant and abundant — and in many cases free — but it may come at a cost, says a new study published in the Journal of Research in Reading.
Study author Anne Mangen, an associate prof of literacy studies at Norway’s University of Stavanger, says she discovered that reading online may not be as rewarding – or effective – as the printed word. The reasons: The process involves so much physical manipulation of the computer that it interferes with our ability to focus on and appreciate what we’re reading; online text moves up and down the screen and lacks physical dimension, robbing us of a feeling of completeness; and multimedia features, such as links to videos and animations, leave little room for imagination, limiting our ability to form our own mental pictures to illustrate what we’re reading.
“The visual happenings on the screen… and your physical interaction with the device is distracting,” Mangen says. “All of these things are taxing on cognition and concentration in a way that a book is not.”
Given her findings, Mangen says that the implications of digital technology should be considered when deciding whether to incorporate computer teaching tools into classroom instruction. She notes that online teaching tools, such as electronic books, are being used from kindergarten up even though there is little research on their effect on learning and development.
“I know from studying kids’ use of the Internet in schools that [there is] the issue of whether kids [stick to] reading,” says Janet Schofield, a psychology prof at the University of Pittsburg, noting that “it’s very easy [for them] to become distracted, because it takes so little effort to go somewhere else” online. She does not discount, however, that online reading has its pluses, most notably that it provides instant access to more info on topics of interest.
Richard Long of the International Reading Association, a nonprofit organization of literacy professionals in Newark, Del., says more research needs to be done to study the effects of online reading on different users. For instance, he says, many older people may absorb more or learn faster by flipping through pages, because their brains have been trained to read hard copy, whereas younger readers may learn faster digitally, because they’re accustomed to working online. “Previous experience has a tremendous impact on rate and thoroughness of learning,” he says. “The actual learning phenomenon is the same at the end of the day.”
May 8th, 2009
Expect something on this in the Boston Globe soon…. a reporter there told me today…..
May 8th, 2009
“Yes, reading is reading.” (Dan Bloom)
May 8th, 2009
True, we still call dialing on the phone as dialing even though we are pushing buttons on a cellphone and NOT dialing. and we still use many old words that have lost their meaning in a new context, like TYPING when we are really using a KeYBOARD. so READING will likely remain a verb for a long long time to come. But a new word or term MIGHT emerge later to reflect the differences betweem reading on paper VS reading on a screen. MIGHT. MIGHT NOT. Let’s talk about this for the next 25 years….
May 8th, 2009
A young man and a cause, you gotta love it.
May 14th, 2009
It’s true that with the time goes by, the things people use are also more evolutionary than the pass.However, people use old word to name the new stuff. That’s because people didn’t aware of the changes while they really use the new things.I think that if the feelings and actions between old and new things are very different and strong enough for people to aware them, the new term should be created.
June 21st, 2009
here is a question for you, do you screen or read?
I screen, you screen, we all screen
by ALEX BEAM in Boston Globe, picking up on many of Susan Wilson’s questions here above:
http://www.boston.com/ae/media/articles/2009/06/19/paper_vs_computer_screen
January 18th, 2011
Hi, just doing some research for my Newark 4g site. Amazing the amount of information on the web. Looking for something else, but interesting page. Take care.
February 19th, 2011
Hello there! Is it Ok if I ask something kind of off subject? I’m struggling to check out this website page with my new ipad but it will not present up right, will you get any solutions? Will i have to possess an update for my software or something like that? many thanks!
May 2nd, 2011
This is excellent information! Thanks so much for sharing your knowledge on this topic.
May 3rd, 2011
Thanks for sharing. Interesting article.
June 1st, 2011
Great post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am impressed! Very helpful information specially the last part :) I care for such info a lot. I was seeking this certain information for a long time. Thank you and good luck.
June 6th, 2011
I am not sure where you are getting your information, but good topic. I needs to spend some time learning more or understanding more. Thanks for fantastic info I was looking for this info for my mission.