Are print media becoming obsolete? Many people think so, with tablets and phones and e-readers all vying for our attention nowadays. Best-selling technology writer Nicholas Carr weighs in on the topic in this August 2013 article from Nautilus.
Read it here: Carr, “Paper versus Pixel”
- With his title, Carr frames a two-sided conflict: paper vs. pixel. On which side does Carr himself stand? Where does he state his position most clearly? What, exactly, does he say?
- The majority of articles about the history and future of printed texts (of which there are many) focus on the technology of printing itself. Why does Carr choose to focus on the invention of Cai Lun? What point is Carr making with his emphasis on paper? Point to examples in the text to support your conclusions.
- Carr presents a wide assortment of evidence to support his argument, from historical accounts to recent scientific and market research. What structure does he employ to keep his ideas flowing smoothly from one section to the next? Is the sequence of evidence effective? Why or why not?
- Carr cites surveys showing that U.S. college students “prefer printed textbooks to electronic ones by an overwhelming margin.” Which do you prefer? Does your preference vary by subject matter or course level? Is a foreign language text, for example, different from one for a biology or economics course? Does print or pixel better facilitate your comprehension? Retention? Attention span? Using Carr as your They Say, write an essay in which you express your textbook preferences, considering these variables as well as any others you find relevant.
They Say I Blog 
In my opinion the print media has only 10 years until it becomes obsolete.
LikeLike
For me paperback is still the absolute and most reliable resource you can refer to. I still value reading books than having fun scrolling with tablet and not learning at all.
LikeLike
The argument of paper reading material being taken over or overruled by electronic sources has been a constant topic ever since the radio was invented. Years ago people said the paper book, newspapers, and even magazines would be replaced by modern technology. And the time has come when we are now closer than ever to that being the case. We see it happening all around us, new technology has brought us e-reading and various types of e-readers that can download and read everything from new books to old book, magazines, and the daily papers even periodicals from around the world. Even more so these e-readers are being placed on types of electronic devices from mp3 players, cell phones, and even portable tablet computers. But even though e-reading has become more readily accessible paperback and hard cover books have remained resilient and are keeping up in sales. And I could not agree more, even though almost everyone in California has a smartphone or some sort of smart device like the newest tablet computer that has e- reading capabilities paper books and printed text are still more popular even among the tech savvy youth crowds. For example, college students have the choice now thanks to technology, to choose between e-books and printed paperback books for classes. But the rate of students who buy paperback and hard cover books is staying the same. Also the same goes for adult readers, the article states that even adult readers prefer paperback and printed text over the latest e-reader software even after E-book sales, which grew exponentially after the launch of Amazon’s Kindle in late 2007. So after reading this article I can agree the paperback books and printed text will never cease to exist nor there ever be a more popular style of reading text.
LikeLike
Carr prefer the book to the e-reader. “We were probably mistaken to think of words on screens as substitutes for words on paper.”
Because Carr know how in portend paper is to everyone.
He likes to agree and then disagree with the people who say paper is a thing of the past.
I prefer hard copies or books to e-books because the e-books you need to ether have a computer or an e- readers. Because it’s easier to reach for the book then to wait for a machine to power up and the book won’t cash if it runs out of power.
LikeLike
Reading this article, and learning about television in pop culture, has reminded me of one of my favorite books that I read long ago, called “Fahrenheit 451”. The book is set in the future, where books are no longer allowed. Fire fighters start fires, instead of putting them out, to destroy books. The people in this future do not read books, watch excessive television, do not think for themselves, or hold meaningful conversations. This is how I picture our world without paper books. Yes, using e-books is still reading, but as the author, Carr, points out in studies, reading from an actual print has more benefits. He says “The physical presence of the printed pages, and the ability to flip back and forth through them, turns out to be important to the mind’s ability to navigate written works, particularly lengthy and complicated ones.” Actual print helps with spatial mental representation and reading comprehension. A reader can absorb more of the information and focus, unlike with reading something on a flat screen. He also says most college students prefer textbooks instead of online books, as do I, I find it more helpful that I can flip through the pages, memorizing where things are and the information. Although, e-books do have its perks. A reader can have easy access to thousands of books, no matter where they are, in a light weight device. I believe print is important in so many ways, and will not become obsolete, as it shouldn’t, but e-books are great as well. Readers shouldn’t have to choose, both should be available.
LikeLike
In this essay, Carr uses a two sided argument of the pros and cons to reading through paper or printed versions of text. He seemed to take the side of printed literature, but he stated valid arguments against himself for technology. He said that reading a physical copy helps interpret and retain the information verses the electronic copies. He believes electronic copies would be best for short articles that can be found through online databases. Electronic copies can be updated frequently. Carr added the history of paper to emphasize why humans find it so natural to pick a book up and see why we read rather than talk. When our language was put on paper, it changed everything having to do with communication. He incorporated a timeline structure in the beginning. Later on in the essay, he began to use compare and contrast from the point where paper and print began to compete. However, by Carr supporting paper in reminding us of how much history there is to it puts his argument in a very good position. Generally, there might not ever be a time where paper will not exist. This country has buildings upon buildings of documentation. This historical documentation can not be scanned onto a thumb drive and accessed by the country to view. Paper material will always have the privacy. However, computer draftings and paper draftings have shifted within the last 10 years, I believe for anyone who is getting into drafting, they will rarely hand draft their material. Carr has made a great point that we have the ability to update our material through the computers. Therefore, the more recent material on computers may be updated and accurate. This argument of paper verses pixel will continue for a while before one will be truly superior to the other.
LikeLike
Paper vs Pixel by Nicholas Carr
Paper books, letters, magazines, etc. are, in my opinion, much easier to read than an electronic version. While I do see some pros to electronic text, such as convince and versatility, there really isn’t a comparison to holding and turning the pages of text on paper. I agree with Carr when he explains that scientist have concluded that reading is a “bodily activity”. There is nothing quite like holding a book or magazine and flipping the pages. For me paper text is much more effective for learning. I can highlight sentences and page numbers, and easily flip back and forth to answer questions. Whereas electronically I would have to scroll or search page numbers. I’m not sure what the future holds, regarding paper text versus pixel text, but I do hope that print text is always apart of our society and world.
LikeLike
With his title, Carr frames a two-sided conflict: paper vs. pixel. On which side does Carr himself stand? Where does he state his position most clearly? What, exactly, does he say?
Carr clearly stands with paper being the superior in the article. “About the obsolescence of the printed page, however, he was entirely wrong. Books, magazines, and newspapers would go on being published and read in ever greater quantities.”(Carr paragraph 6) This is just one the things Carr mentions to support his side, he also references research studies, which show repeated results of success when reading print among young adults. He also emphasizes the benefits of reading a book in print rather than in an e-book. He states that mental maps are quickly developed when individuals become familiar with sections that involve certain topics they need to study or just enjoy reading about. We can share what we read and store information better due to the interaction with books. Even though computers have their convenience and role, books will always rival electronics because humans tend to be physical beings. Electronics do serve as a better tool however,when it comes to sharing information internationally. Personally I prefer print due to it’s flexibility (not literally) when it comes to school and traveling. Computer screens are also an inferior quality.
LikeLike
I like Nicholas Carr’s 2 sided argument of his work Paper Versus Pixel. He goes over his views of how we are affected by them and leans more towards printed work for everyone than pixel.
Although technology has evolved and has became more favored over the years i believe paper will always be around. Paper text has been in our lives for so long it would take long period of time for it to disappear. A lot of us have been brought up with printed text and schools do their best to encourage us to use them. Which is why we grew very comfortable and more familiar with it. Electronic text is ‘new’ yet seems to be more popular because our generation now is surrounded by it. Articles, essays, Journals, or emails are a lot easier to find or receive on the web. Since it is still ‘new’ to us we like to use it, for it is something different yet handy. Although it does depend on the person; one might prefer e-text than print or vise versa.
I myself, like both ways. I like paper because i can highlight and flip through pages and ‘feel’ what i am learning. Nicholas Carr even states that students (through surveys) retain information better through printed text because it is more “flexible” and easier to handle. And it is a “bodily activity” which is why we tend understand printed text easier. Although, With e-text i can find papers a lot faster and more up-to-date. Also, E-text can be edited,created quicker and there is a larger variety of readings than print.
I do not believe there should be a winner in this argument for both (print or e-text) are useful in their own ways and both should be available for us all.
LikeLike
I believe that print media is becoming obsolete. We have so many cool new ways of viewing content, that paper isn’t the most convenient option anymore. There are still the few people who like to have actual paper in their hands, but they seem to be among the older crowd. And the younger generations are growing up in the era of technology where at some point, we won’t use paper media at all.
LikeLike
I think Nicholas Carr addresses all the possible points, and arguments regarding paper vs. pixel. Right now I find myself using paper books about the same amount as electronic books. While electronic text is more abundant and easier to access(many times free)there is something about reading on real paper that is more satisfying. Perhaps it is that staring at a screen of black text on a white back light can start to do hurt the eyes, or the instant gratification of flipping a page is too much to pass up. But as of right now I don’t see e-text taking over completely, at least not in my generation.
LikeLike
Amy Hemstreet is right that print media is becoming obsolete, but I disagree that electronic media is the most convenient option. From personal experience, I have found that it is much more convenient to pick up a paper book than it is to read on any form of technology. Computers can sometimes be too large to carry with us, and if they are not, we run into the problem of finding an outlet once it starts to die. Tablets, e-readers, etc. are wonderful for reading books, but again, they eventually die and we are stuck with the problem of finding a way to charge them when we are out. I think that Carr brings up a good point when he says, “sales of hardcovers and trade paperbacks have remained surprisingly resilient.” Print media is becoming obsolete, but, according to Carr’s information, the general population still finds it to be the most convenient option for reading.
LikeLike
Nicholas Car was asked to write for the Nautilus Quarterly in 2013 to look at how the influence of electronic and physical mediums affected perceptions: he wrote Paper Versus Pixel. Despite Carr not specifically mentioning his position within his article one could interpret that he is personally in favor of the rise of electronic media. One could draw that conclusion by how he makes statements in the middle of the article about how people perceive paper Carr writes “It’s hard to respect something that you’re forever throwing in the trash or flushing down the john or blowing your nose into” this statement clearly states his opposition for paper.
LikeLike
Carr understands that that when he was writing this article that it was not to persuade a side to pick paper or digital, but to clarify that they both are needed. 2 sides to an argument does a wonderful job at getting the point across that both paper and digital have there place when it comes to reading. The beginning starting off with the rise of technology, but towards the end, the studies on paper books vs. digital.
LikeLike
Nicholas Carr was asked to write for the Nautilus Quarterly in 2013 to look at how the influence of electronic and physical mediums affects people’s perceptions: he expressed varying perspectives within Paper Versus Pixel. Within his article he does a great job provides an unbiased opinion by providing information for both sides of the never ending debate into which medium would prevail. Also within his article Carr integrates very well a history, quotes and facts and figures, this inclusion allows you to shape your own opinion .Which one do you think will prevail paper or pixel.
LikeLike
I believe that print media are becoming obsolete. In a world where innovators develop new technologies every day, the necessity of print media is a thing of the past. Electronic media, rather than print media, is exceedingly cheaper. As tablets become cheaper and more accessible, more and more people turn away from print books. For a one time investment of usually less than one hundred dollars, people gain the ability to purchase and read books for a price less than the print. Over time, this saved money adds up. This is not only true for books, but also newspapers. Instead of purchasing a newspaper, almost six dollars at times, we can access thousands of reputable news sources online for free. As people gain better access to these news sources, they inevitably find information on environmental degradation. According to the World Resources Institute (WRI), each year, we lose about seven million hectares of our world’s forest (13 million hectares disappearing from deforestation, with eight million added back from afforestation efforts). This leaves only about 22 percent of all forests intact. If we, people who benefit from oxygenated air from our forests’ trees, become even more dependent on electronic media, we will only be at an advantage. Thus, print media are becoming and will further become obsolete.
LikeLike
I believe that although digital forms of media are important, having print still has a significant impact in people’s lives. Having physical contact with the work and having more interactions with the layout improves memory of the work. It has been studied and proven that using print has greater memorization and general understanding than digital. Not only that, but having the physical connection appeals to our senses of sight, touch, and even smell. I know that I personally prefer having physical books to read, even though they may not be as convenient. Something about touching the book and especially the new book smell is more entertaining and intriguing to me. It encourages reading, for me, in a way that digital forms cannot. It is also simpler to interact with the text, such as annotating and highlighting, with print texts. Therefore, despite advantages to using digital forms of things like convenience and conservation, print forms also have invaluable uses, even in these modern times.
LikeLike
Some argue that electronic forms of media are taking over the industry and replacing printed media, but physical texts still overshadow the importance of digital media in people’s lives. Not only is printed text simpler, more versatile, and more beneficial than digital media, but it is also more readily and easily made available to society. Yes, digital texts can be convenient due to the vast memory on many devices, bu with digital media comes issues of finding internet and maintaining battery life, both of which are non existent with physical texts. Paper books can be read anywhere at anytime, and even if internet is available, the human mind makes a connection between physical pages and knowledge we read that helps retain the ideas of the text better than reading from a screen. Because of its simplicity and the tangible experience that comes with it, printed books still remain an important part of our everyday lives. Now even if digital media was more effective and interesting than physical text, the devices used to read them still cost quite a chunk of change that many cannot afford. To those people it would be so much easier to borrow a book or spend a few cents on a newspaper. Even though the digital industry has grown greatly in recent years, it has yet to overcome the power of paper.
LikeLike
Mr.Carr begins his article by bestowing accolades on Cai Lun and his creation of paper. He continues his debate on the longevity of paper books versus e-books, claiming that as society becomes more technologically driven, so will our books be electronic,to the detriment of physical, books of paper. Responses to his article claim that the ability to carry many books, or even an entire library in the palm of your hand, via an e-reader is our future. The e-reader proponents argue that an e-reader can contain a light, the reader can “turn” the pages, the cost is less. The pro-list continues with textbooks and technical books which are typically quite thick and expensive. The e-reader can contain this entire book, allowing someone the ability to carry it anywhere, and use it, is a more favorable option.
However the creation of hand-made paper has not gone out of style, but is still considered a specialty and an honored gift. The talent of making paper has involved to include fibers from sources other than wood, including jeans. Generally someone that reads because they love to read has many factors to consider; reading involves at least 4 of the 5 senses. Books come with a smell, whether it is from the publisher, the store, or from storage, the pages smell wonderful. Reading is obviously a very visual thing to do physically, but it also involves the ability to visualize in your mind, in your imagination. Hearing is involved by using your ears to hear the pages being turned. When sitting down to read, usually a person will place himself away from distractions and other noises, in order to hear the words, to hear the author, and to concentrate on the story at hand. Lastly the sense of touch is involved. Touching the book, picking it off the shelf, feeling the spine and cover in your hands is so very special. Once the book is being held, the touch of turning a page is very tactile. Some argue the ability to turn the page of an e-reader, but there is no sense of touch involved whatsoever with an e-page. Only with a book of print can a person run his/her fingers over the words and feel the impressions on the page.
Most readers could care less for storing an entire library of books in one small, hand-held device. Those of us that love to read, want to hold a book. Usually we have not only shelves of books, but stacks of books in each room. We read them, and re-read them. We cherish our treasured books. These volumes are a part of our very existence, and we would not, no, could not, part with them.
LikeLike
“People were flocking to the screen. Paper was toast.” Carr quoted Morrison. Of course some might object that Paper isn’t “toast”, but growing rather obsolete. Although I concede that paper books are being over shadowed by electronic books, I still maintain that paper books can be more useful in some situations. Carr mentions Cai’s invention of paper. This was obviously a very important invention, and shaped societies hundreds of years into the future. Without paper, it can be strongly argued that we’d never invent the internet and common technologies without the invention of paper; or, discover it at a much slower pace.
LikeLike
I feel that paper reading is a better technology than electronic because it lasts longer and you can always get to it. There are always downsides to the internet, when something glitches, or is slow, of the technology simply becomes too outdated to be used. With books, it can really stand the test of time unlike e readers or computers. The advantage to electronic reading is simply the conveniency of owning the device where you can obtain the books.
LikeLike
Carr tells a story about technology, reading, and writing to make a point that paperback books are better than e-books. My own experience with reading yields a point that is both similar and different. What I take away from my own experience with reading is that I prefer an e-book over a paperback when it comes to reading for my own entertainment. Although, if I am reading from a textbook, I’d rather not read it from a screen.
LikeLike
Paper vs. Pixel by Nicholas Carr
Carr begins the article “Paper vs. Pixel” by describing the evolution of paper. Cai Lun the original inventor of paper, which was invented approximately the year 105 AD, never gets recognized for his invention. We thoroughly rely on paper every day of our lives which brings us to the question; what would our lives be like without paper? A resource that we rely on and take for granted, would have a devastating effect if we were to be without it. Now we come to the argument of paper books versus e-books. In discussions of “Paper vs. Pixel,” a controversial issue is whether paper books will outlive the use of electronics that have bombarded our society. While some argue that paperbacks are outdated and are going to be obsolete within a number of years, others contend that reading by paper books is far more enjoyable than reading books online. This is not to say that e-books have become popular and some people do prefer them over paper books. However, the sale of paper books outranks the number of e-books sold. Personally, I find that while reading paper books I am able to learn more information and retain it better, whereas when I have to read something online, I discover that I have difficulty concentrating and am easily distracted.
LikeLike
After reading Carr’s article “Paper versus Pixel” I question Carr on how he came up with such idea to write this and what was his purpose. As I was reading his article and I pointed out his message to the readers was to try and and read as much more printed books because they benefit more than the screen pages because it completely destroys your critical thinking and it’s not worth to read of off the screen pages. I also find it very interesting how more people would still choose and prefer printed books versus screen pages. From this article I’ve learned that people who prefer to read from the print books their brain works much better comparing to the people that prefer to read from the screen pages. Today the more and the newer technology becomes the more more people become addicted to technology.Every single year the percentage of internet users grows bigger which is unfortunately true. Back then people didn’t have anything to write one and a guy named Cai invented paper for people to write on. Though he died right after he invented paper his product was very useful and it got famous throughout the entire world which benefited people a lot. I personally prefer to read off of the printed books because I find it more convenient and it feels more real, I don’t find it interesting to read off of the screen page since I get too tired staring at the screen and it distracts me from getting my work done.
LikeLike
After reading Nicholas Carr’s article on Paper versus Pixel, I learned that there are many reasons why people prefer one over the other. In discussions of paper books versus electronic books a controversial issue is whether printed books are better than reading screen pages. While some argue that using an e-book gives you the ability to read many books at one time and have them all in one place others contend that reading a printed version of the book gives you the ability to understand the material more. Studies have shown that students who read something in print have a better chance of understanding what they read, than students who have read the screen version. Having a physical copy of the book in front of you, will help the reader navigate through the pages more. Personally, when I read something on the Internet I get easily distracted and at the end, sometimes I don’t even remember what I have read. I like to have the book in my hand when reading it and it helps me to understand the material that I am reading more. Cai Lun’s invention of paper was very great at the time, so that it even made other products such as papyrus, and wooden tablets obsolete. Now others are saying that the internet, and kindles will replace paper in a matter of years. Fortunately, I don’t agree. When Kindles first came out the number of people buying books did not drop. Instead it either stayed the same or rose in some parts. Even though people have the electronic copy of a book, for the most part they still continue to prefer the printed version. So after reading this article, I continue to believe that paper will not be replaced anytime soon. There will still be those people that continue to use it even if others will have completely stopped.
LikeLike
They say printed text is on it’s way to being obsolete, I say however that printed text will be around for many years to come. Cai Lun’s invention of paper, as Carr states, is one of the most if not the most important invention in history. I agree with his standpoint on the future of paper. He states, “This year in the U.S., some 2 billion books and 350 million magazines will roll off the presses.” This estimate is too high for a medium that is coming to an end. Carr’s reference to a college student study doesn’t just apply to students. I would bet that the majority of the people in the United States would rather a printed book than an ebook. Despite an ebook’s convenience, the feel of a solid book in your hand with no distracting hyperlinks or advertisements will remain superior.
LikeLike
While discussing such topics as those addressed in Nicholas Carr’s “Paper vs Pixels” article, many are left trying to justify the stance of either printed literature or electronic documents against the other. While many find a tangible book to be the best option for reading, others submit that the use of electronic media is both more practical and economical. In either case, each party looks to justify just their stance. While I can see how one might be lead to do this, it is my experience and opinion that each are equally useful in today’s evolving society. This is to say that the use of printed books is incredibly useful for many applications, but possibly not as suited for some of these as electronic media can be. This causes me to believe that both are likely to remain in use for much time to come. I would also be inclined to add that when printed books came into widespread use with the invention of the printing press, nobody anticipated the use of computers for written language in the future. Connecting this to our current time frame, the near future may hold new types of media that we as members of the 21st century cannot predict. It is quite likely that an entirely new and unanticipated medium will enter this debate in years to come.
LikeLike
With my experience using both and printed books and pix-elated e-books, I can confidently say that printed books are still preferred for the majority of the literate population. I can see that slowly and overtime, people are switching from printed to pix-elated mainly because of the convenience and cheap properties of the e-book. In my personal opinion that people should consider is that printed books are far more exceptionable based on the properties of time and personal connection. Printed books can last for a very long time while pix-elated books rely on a hard drive that can and will not work. If the hard drive breaks, then all the “data” of books will be gone. Printed Books can also provide a personal connection with readers as the very act of turning a page is more engaging then clicking a button. Printed beats pixels, all the time.
LikeLike
The debate between paper and pixels has been one that is long going ever since e-books and the internet came about. Although I did take part in the excitement of e-books and the thought of having many books in a single tablet, I soon found myself going back to printed books. It was not just with books that I would read in my spare time, but also textbooks. When a teacher tells me that my textbook will be online, I am at first filled with the excitement of not having to carry my textbook everywhere. But, as I begin to use my online textbook, I find it bothersome that I can only look at one page at a time. Also, any written work that has been pixelated does not give the same satisfying feeling when you’re reading it that a book does.
LikeLike
The two sided argument that Carr displays, in his eyes, is obvious. He spends the majority of the article informing the reader with everything about paper. He tells us: who made it, how it “may be the single most versatile invention in human history”, the studies on how good it is, etc. Then, he only has a couple small counter-claims with the benefits or pixel.
I personally prefer paper over pixel by a wide margin. Having a medium that I am aware has space and depth to it, is not only more satisfying, but as he mentioned, found it easier to recall passages, and was able to remember the structure of the plot a lot better.
LikeLike
After trading the article in Nicholas Carr’s book “The Shallows the chapter of paper versus Pixel, I learned how books and online books had there benefits and downfalls. For example how electronic books can be more distracting to the common person ,due to the fact that it is on a device that you can go off on and check other social media while you are to be looking at a book. Or how a physical book can be brought anywhere and if it gets wet or dropped it will not break. there are many different opinions in the word about weather e-books or books are better. personally I find that reading a regular book is much more simpler for me to do. I would chose a normal book over a e-book because as it was mentioned in this article of Carr’s book that some people can become more distracted by a online type of book. i do better having something to hold onto and to be able to touch, flip , write in ,etc. i find it much more easy to stay focused when reading out of a physical book.
LikeLike
Of course some might object that using templates both stifles creativity and encourages subjective personal opinions. Although i concede that i consider myself a passable writer without this technique, I still maintain that it could help my future writings.
LikeLike
As the internet has become the more widely used medium as a resource to many people around the world, the printed book has lost some of its popularity and some may even say that it is becoming obsolete. The e-book is more economical and easier to access in some ways, making it a more practical tool (which is most likely the cause of the shift in popularity towards e-books) , but I feel that the printed book is a medium that is under appreciated. The printed book, once produced, consumes no energy, lasts in all weather, has no reliance on a hard drive or internet connection and most importantly, it lacks all of the distractions that can come with being connected to the internet; with all of the notifications, ads and pop-ups it can be difficult for a reader to stay focused on the work in front of them and stray towards other topics, disrupting their thinking process. The printed book is not only preferred by many but is the medium of choice for those that recognize the negatives that come with the inexpensive e-books of the 21st century.
LikeLike
In my opinion, reading on paper is the easiest and most useful compared to electronic reading. With technology nowadays, there’s always glitching and problems. But you can’t go wrong with paperback books or articles. In this article, Carr seems to favor paper over an electronic way of reading. He brings up how important paper is in our everyday lives and how different life would’ve been if Cai Lun never invented paper.
LikeLike
Through his writing, Carr shows evidence of both technology and print use, to make the point that these two are compatible and people will continue to use both of them. My own experience with paper and off the screen reading is similar, each of them have their own advantages in different situations. As a result, I concluded that, although we live in an era of technology, off the screen reading will never completely substitute paper print.
LikeLike
In this article Nicholas Carr talks about how such a simple technology (in this case paper) can be taken to the next level, exemplified, and taken for granted. Paper is a great invention as Carr states, and surely it is taken for granted. Paper is everywhere and without it we would be lost. What I believe Carr is trying to stress here is that the internet is almost the new paper. The internet is everywhere nowadays, and although it is not as old as paper it is relied on almost as much. I think what he is trying to say that just like paper is taken for granted and used in our everyday lives, the internet will be the same way. Eventually reliance on the internet will be as great as paper and will be something we cannot live without.
LikeLike
Carr tells a story about the discussions and arguments between the printed media and the online media, and whether the online media is going to bring with it the extinction of the printed texts. He does so to make the point that people are actually thinking about this topic. People are aware that online texts are becoming very popular, and it in some ways has decreased the number of people reading printed texts. However, from my experience with paper versus digital texts, I do have to admit that I prefer printed text better. It is easier to focus on, allowing me to understand it better and take more away from it. Some people may prefer digital texts, however from what I take away from my own experience is that there are still plenty of people that would much prefer a physical book, whether it be textbook, novel, whatever, over the digital version. As a result, I conclude that the books seemingly still have a long life ahead of them. If they ever do go “extinct”, it won’t be for quite a long time.
LikeLike
I see both being very useful for their respective reasons. I myself own one of the early Kindles that only does the e-books and serves its purpose well. Say if I’m reading a novel for enjoyment and I wouldn’t have to take notes, annotate, or learn from it, then I would go with the Kindle. When it comes to textbooks or books that are needed for a class or paper, I prefer paper. It is so much easier to use the physical book to acquire information from and to annotate what you are reading. E-books are also a lot more portable while the textbooks are heavier but a more “useful” tool.
LikeLike
In discussions of “Paper VS. Pixels”, a controversial issue is whether paper copies of text are starting to become obsolete. While some argue that paper bound text will continue to be constantly used by readers, others contend that the internet will take over with online texts and books making the paper text obsolete. This is not to say that one side is right or the other is wrong. Nobody knows what will happen in the near future. I think that slowly paper bound text is starting to slowly disappear from our lives. Like the article said there are many smartphones and tablets that we can use to read. Yes, in one of the articles it said that, “College students prefer printed textbooks”, but with everyday people rely more on the internet. People would rather carry a laptop with all the textbooks they need online, rather than carry 5 books in their backpack.
LikeLike
In discussions of “Paper vs. Pixels”, a controversial issue is whether paper will soon disappear due to the eBooks, electronic textbooks, and so on. While some argue that no matter what happens paper books and textbooks will still be around, others contend that slowly the printed text will wither away. In my opinion I think that no matter what printed text will stick around and will always have a key role in our lives. Carr began to explain both sides of the situation, explaining how we should be seeing paper for centuries to come, and I agree.
LikeLike
Carr himself undoubtedly prefers the paper book to the e-book and I myself agree. Physically holding a book and flipping the pages helps our minds comprehend and experience the content of the book, therefore we fully submerge our minds into what we are reading. I don’t think reading paper material such as books or magazines will become obsolete anytime in the near future. Even though the amount of people using e-books is slowly increasing a lot of people prefer or enjoy reading a physical paper copy of something. Paper is a major part of our life whether we notice it or not. Documents, books, and tests are all written on paper therefore I don’t believe it will ever become obsolete. Paper is a whole world to the human race, it may not be recognized as so but, it is of vital importance in our world.
LikeLike
Of course some might object to the popularity and importance of print media in this day and age, but I feel that it still has a place in the world. I believe this because there are many facts that show that there are many positives that balance with the negatives of the printed page. Many people state that that the screen page makes them more easily distracted and I would agree with this because there are always things like social media that are one click away, making a reader tempted to stray away from the page. I also think that the print page gives a reader an experience that the screen page never could. Something about being able to hold what your reading in front of you makes it so much easier to focus on what the pages are trying to say. The screen pages are far more detached in my opinion, so it is more challenging for a reader to truly connect with the information that is front of them. Although I concede that screen pages are becoming more popular due to accessibility, I still maintain that there are many great things about print pages which is why they will survive in our technology-based society.
LikeLike
Carr’s feels that a paper back book is better than an e reader. I can also agree with him because I feel that when you read from a book it’s easier to concentrate. Also I like the durability of the book compared to an e-reader, and don’t have to worry about charging it. E- readers are the future though because it saves paper and it is easier and faster to get any book you’d like.
LikeLike
With paper and pen being so easy to use anywhere in the world, it would seem that it would never become obsolete, if per say you were out of power in mid winter what would you do without access to online forms of books? Why, one would read a physical book. In other cases such as airplanes where you cannot use your online books. If paper and ink gets wet, you can simply dry it off. If someone were to sink a nook into a tub of water you wouldn’t be able to regain it’s former state. You would be left with just a broken electronic. Each forms of literature have their pro’s and cons, paper seeming to have more pro’s.
LikeLike
In my opinion Carr focuses on the invention by Cai Lun to emphasize how important the invention of paper was, so then when he says,” It’s hard to respect something that you’re forever throwing in the trash or flushing down the john or blowing your nose into.” meaning that we take advantage of it. People will not see the importance of paper until it’s gone. It also has its plusses because not trees are being saved due to the fact that not as much paper is used.
LikeLike
After reading the article “Paper vs. Pixel” by Mr. Carr, I realized how important and how much of an impact paper made on society. I noticed how Carr stood with paper over pixel because he used many arguments and even counter arguments to prove his point. Carr also focuses on the invention of paper because it emphasizes the efficiency and durability of paper. It shows that paper has never gone away and never will go away because of that. Carr argues that the feeling of physical paper actually has a better effect on the brain that reading from a screen cannot. I agree with Carr and his arguments and also believe that paper holds a better value than pixel will ever have mentally and physically. This kind of argument is what Carr uses along with research and history to create his point of how paper is better than pixel.
LikeLike
After reading Carr’s “Paper Vs. Pixel”, the article points out the major differences between the two mediums. He starts off by telling us the evolution of paper. Cai Lun, practically invented paper, and went unrecognized for it. We use it so much, and don’t even really think of the true advantages reading and writing gives us. When we read by scrolling versus a physical object by flipping pages, our mind processes both differently. By reading paper a mental map is made in our heads, which also causes us to hold the information in our mind. Based off of personal experience, I agree with Carr, and find that reading from pages, and having a physical object in my hand is full of advantages. E-books are very convenient, but they just don’t hold the same value as a printed book. I find when I read things online, or e-book, I just can’t stay focused for a long period of time. I start to skim and just get distracted.
LikeLike
In discussion of reading and writing, a controversial issue is whether a book is more significant rather than a pixelated computer. While some argue that it is more useful to read in a printed book, others confirm that using the internet is more helpful. In my opinion, Carr gives many educational claims that the Internet affects the way humans think in his article “Paper vs. Pixel”. He explains how often we take paper for granted and how important it is in our society, but he also explains that he thinks that paper will always be useful even if it starts to become less useful. Looking at a flat computer screen compared to a physical printed books affects our way of thinking. This is a reason why I agree with the opinion that using a template is very useful in the “They Say/I Say” preface. It not only keeps students organized but develops many writing ideas that they may have never thought of before. As useful as it is to use a computer to find everything with a click of the mouse, it is also to stay mindful of standard, traditional terms of reading and writing.
LikeLike
Nicholas Carr sparks the discussion of paper versus pixel, a controversial issue of which medium is superior. It is obvious there is two different sides on which is superior. Both mediums are commonly used, screen and paper, daily. Many people, especially students tend to prefer paper book. I believe this is because the attentiveness rises due to the fact of lower amounts of distractions presented. I do also believe paper and books will be used for years to come. Author Ian Sansom writes, “If paper were to disappear, everything would be lost.” Mediums which use paper are slowing collapsing at a devastating rate. Newspapers, replaced by television news and live updates from cell phones. Also mail, commonly being replaced by messaging over the internet and social media. If paper were to disappear I don’t believe everything would be lost, but I think part of us would. Paper still is a daily tool and for it to just disappear, just to be replaced by technology and internet would be mind blowing. To think ahead of what lies in store for us in our later years is close to impossible to predict.
LikeLike
In discussions about electronically writing and reading and handwritten words, a controversial issue is whether we are slowly losing our abilities and traditions of writing and reading on actual paper because of the recent advances on electronic devices. While some argue that people are still reading magazines and other material a lot, others contend more people are now reading online and writing as well. That is not to say technology has taken over, just simply it’s slowly becoming the most efficient and effective way to read, write, and do much more. Now a days I feel that people are more likely to pick up their phone to do research than an actual book because they’ve become so accustomed to doing everything fast and easy with their device.
LikeLike