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 
After reading Carr’s article about Paper vs. Pixel textbooks, I have learned many things about why some people perfer one over the other. Personally, I would rather have paper because I learn better with physical items and it would be better than staring at a screen hurting your eyes. I feel like some subject change my opinion and one would include Art. I say this because art on a digital frame is a lot more appealing and detailed than that of in a book. But if I were to choose between the two I would definitely choose paper.
LikeLike
I have found through my studies that I prefer printed texts over digital texts especially in more reading intensive courses. I took my first two years of college courses online while in the military, and even then I preferred to have printed textbooks at home. There have even been classes in which the necessary texts were provided digitally and I still went and had these materials printed for my own use.
This has become even more prominent as my courses become more difficult. I like to be able to reference my work, highlight important passages, or take notes in the margins of the printed text. This is not possible with a digital publication, so then my notes are apart form the material I am learning, which must then later be realigned for my studying purposes. I also am able to read and comprehend at a much higher rate with printed texts. Whereas digital documents tend to strain my eyes, and I lose focus.
LikeLike
4.
In discussions of using physical paper or electronic files, the issue at hand is whether or not we should move towards the technology based reading, such as eBooks, rather than paper books. While some argue that books on paper are timeless and easier to study, others maintain that eBooks are the next logical step in terms of use of technology, and they continue to push the paper books out of existence with better screen reading technology available and more being developed. Personally, I still find it easier to use a paper book because flipping back and forth is still way more convenient with a physical copy. Books have been the staple for passing on information for ages, and without them we would not know what our ancestors did and thought. I personally own an eBook player, but It mostly gets used for apps for for children because I just can’t seem to look at the screen too long. Carr states that even among the public, paper books have stayed significantly above eBooks in popularity and sales. Most people do agree that it is easier to focus on book pages than eBook screens, and facts have shown that books still have the majority of the reading popularity. Not only do most opinions lie on the side of books instead of eBooks, but facts are also there to back it up. EBooks may become more popular overtime and are convenient from time to time, but books will never be replaced by them.
LikeLike
I disagree with Carr’s argument that printed and digital books are complementary because I believe that the printed books should be entirely replaced by digital books. Using e-books on computers or tablets can protect the environment since we do not need to use many papers to produce printed books and handouts. In fact, many trees are killed for making printed books every year and increase the burden of the natural environment. Killing too many tree is negatively affect humans’ life because people need the oxygen release by tree’s photosynthesis; hence, trees are very important to humans. In addition, many book companies update the books every three to five years. Even though there is no big difference between the old and new editions, the companies make many new copies to replace the old one in order to earn much profit, so this wastes many papers eventually. In contrast, a computer or tablet can store over hundreds or thousands of books and documents. Hence, if most people use tablets to study, they can avoid wasting numerous papers for printed books and energy for making printed books. According to an article, “How Do Paper Books Affect the Environment?” the author discusses the negative impacts that brought by using paper books. The author brings out a shocking statistic and she writes, “50% of the world’s trees have already been cleared and burned and the remainder of them have been degraded” (How Do Paper Books Affect the Environment?”). This quotation can support my argument that relying on printed book kills many trees. Humans would not be able to survive if there are a lack of trees because the air would be unsuitable for breathing. Indeed, people should follow the trend that using e-books to read. This not only can get the same information as printed books but can protect our environment. Consequently, I refute Carr’s argument that people can use both printed and digital books as a complement, while people should give up printed textbooks in order to protect the environment.
LikeLike
Nicholas Carr explains how physical copies of a writing is better than ebooks. He provides evidence that reading a physical copy allows the reader to focus more and reading ebooks will not allow us to retain the evidence as well. I sit in the middle of this case because I like both physical and electrical readings. But, I do admit that when reading ebooks or online I get distracted by the little things sometimes like the brightness and the ads. I will continue to use both because of how convenient they are in different situations.
LikeLike