Does Paper-less Reading Mean "Better" Reading?

By Alan

Some news that got the tech and literary world buzzing: Amazon announced the newest member of the paperless future, The Kindle DX. This is supposed to be the digital answer to text books and newspapers. The larger format screen (9.7 inches diagonal) and low power usage is supposed to be the college student's dream for text books.

Let me preface this by saying that I've written and re-written this commentary several times. There are a number of interesting conflicting views of prediction that really aren't going to be known until the future plays out. I believe that the newspaper industry is going to struggle. It might ultimately fail. Journalism is also going through a huge transformation. It might also ultimately fail. I think that the textbook industry is intentionally expensive and confusing.

While this is a huge advancement towards total digital reading, even Amazon recognizes its shortcomings and calls it, "On the way to the paper-less society," not that it had arrived.

Don't get me wrong. I think that the Kindle is a wave of the future. Off and on, I've been reading electronic text/books/novels/news via portable electronic devices for a dozen years or more, and if I could afford it, I would probably get a Kindle (the bigger, the better). I read all of my news online via smartphone or browser. I love e-books for novels.

However, people read in different ways, depending on the content and the layout of the device holding the text. Note: Device might mean Kindle, cell phone, laptop, big screen, newsprint, paperback, hardback, scroll, papyrus, or concrete wall graffiti.

When reading novels (fiction or non-fiction), it's typically a nice linear front-to-back style. You might back up a page or two if you missed something, or you wanted to re-read a reference of a character you just met.

However, unlike reading novels, it is actually quite difficult to duplicate the type of reading that you might do with a newspaper, or equal some of the habits necessary for college course study with a single page view. Many people underestimate how much information can be conveyed on an unfolded newsprint page.

Consider: The New York Times is printed in "broadsheet" format, with six columns of print per page. That means you have approximately 30 inches by 22 inches, or almost 660 square inches of information. The Kindle DX is only 97 square inches. The newspaper is almost seven times the area.

Now, that's just talking about the raw text that you are reading. But, the newspaper experience is more than just the text. The human mind is amazing in its ability to retain all kinds of additional related information (meta-data) surrounding your reading. Most people are able to remember the position on the newspaper that a story is located, and perhaps the other stories located nearby. In the back of their mind, they might be able to remember the thought processes while skimming past the articles. How many stories have you read because you stumbled across them looking for another article, rather than looking specifically for them. Advertisers would rely on that serendipity of browsing the large scale format.

As for text book usage? It might help with most kinds of study, but it won't substitute for a library table filled with reference books all open to their own pages.

As an e-book reader, the Kindle is first-rate. As a book, the Kindle is almost there. It can serve as a news reader. I'll be picky and say it is not a newspaper substitute. However, like the buggy whip, newspaper reading might be relegated to a select few afficianados.