On another note altogether, I went to a talk last night about the importance of reading, of honouring the word.
The speaker LOVED words. He was an old guy, who had written a whack of books, and he raised several interesting points (that I understood, I imagine he raised more, but I didn't get them all...MAN could he talk fast).
One person in the audience asked how he felt about kids reading on-line, blogs, papers, whatever...his response was that a word is a word, and reading is reading be it on paper, or electronically. He maintained that there are blogs out there that are incredibly literate, and beautiful to read, that he can get the news he wants faster on-line than through the paper, that the political and analysis pieces he can find on-line are more timely, thoughtful and well written than much he finds elsewhere.
I was surprised a bit, I think partially because somewhere inside me lurks a paper snob. I don't value reading on-line the way I value reading a book somehow, which is strange considering the proportions of time I spend doing each; though if I had access to more written media in English, that ratio would change...
Somehow, I don't feel that reading on-line is of the same qualitative value as reading a book. Simultaneously, I don't agree with myself (aren't we humans amazing!?!) This is something else I have to work my head around, I am still not sure what I think. I am not sure that placing a value judgement is even relevant, like trying to decide whether writing with a pen is or isn't really writting. Maybe only writting with a pencil is true writting.
Sounds silly that way doesn't it.
Do you feel a qualitative difference between the two? How much do you read on line vs. on paper?
I feel a survey coming on...
....later, make that three...they're up there, please be counted.