Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jack7" data-source="post: 5629875" data-attributes="member: 54707">That's about right. I mean, as in teenager and in my twenties (about 30 to 40 years ago) most of my friends read both a lot of literature, and science, and religion, etc. and a lot of modern stuff. (It makes me laugh to think of dying in 1986 as somehow a &quot;death among ancients,&quot; but sometimes I forget some of you are really young by comparison - the first computer I saw was a NASA punch card and magnetic tape reel computer.) But now with e-readers they don't read literature or science or religion much, just sort of new pop releases. (Pop as in popular.) But now that you mention it popular was a lot different concept back then than it is now too.By the way I was around before the internet period. And I remember it as just a research sharing network among university buddies. Back then anyway. (Humorously I feel like my grandmother explaining to me about the time before television. Now I know why she would laugh when she talked about it.)I may be seeing nothing of real importance in the long run. Don't know yet. Just making an observation about changes in reading habits I suspect may be tied to new technologies. But ya got a really good point with your question. Back when I was a kid there was basically no competition to books at all, short of magazines. (As an information outlet. You had TV news on 3 channels but that wasn't book competition, and most of TV was just entertainment, not info, like you can get today.)We're living in the first age, it seems to me, where not only is there a huge and wide variety of content to compete for people's limited reading time, but also where there are several different actual methods (books, internet, social media, blogs, message boards, e-readers, cell phones) for delivering content. And I'm suspecting that each method may have it's own particular, or at least preferred &quot;content nebula, or content cluster,&quot; or to use the modern vernacular, a preferred &quot;Content Cloud.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jack7, post: 5629875, member: 54707"] That's about right. I mean, as in teenager and in my twenties (about 30 to 40 years ago) most of my friends read both a lot of literature, and science, and religion, etc. and a lot of modern stuff. (It makes me laugh to think of dying in 1986 as somehow a "death among ancients," but sometimes I forget some of you are really young by comparison - the first computer I saw was a NASA punch card and magnetic tape reel computer.) But now with e-readers they don't read literature or science or religion much, just sort of new pop releases. (Pop as in popular.) But now that you mention it popular was a lot different concept back then than it is now too. By the way I was around before the internet period. And I remember it as just a research sharing network among university buddies. Back then anyway. (Humorously I feel like my grandmother explaining to me about the time before television. Now I know why she would laugh when she talked about it.) I may be seeing nothing of real importance in the long run. Don't know yet. Just making an observation about changes in reading habits I suspect may be tied to new technologies. But ya got a really good point with your question. Back when I was a kid there was basically no competition to books at all, short of magazines. (As an information outlet. You had TV news on 3 channels but that wasn't book competition, and most of TV was just entertainment, not info, like you can get today.) We're living in the first age, it seems to me, where not only is there a huge and wide variety of content to compete for people's limited reading time, but also where there are several different actual methods (books, internet, social media, blogs, message boards, e-readers, cell phones) for delivering content. And I'm suspecting that each method may have it's own particular, or at least preferred "content nebula, or content cluster," or to use the modern vernacular, a preferred "Content Cloud." [/QUOTE]

Verification