how did i not see this until today?: shaun micallef wreaks havoc on channel ten’s breakfast show
(Source: youtube.com)
how did i not see this until today?: shaun micallef wreaks havoc on channel ten’s breakfast show
(Source: youtube.com)
suggested by spiffyvero
This post is part of “How We Will Read,” an interview series exploring the future of books from the perspectives of publishers, writers, and intellectuals. Read our kickoff post with Steven Johnson here. And check out our new homepage, a captivating new way to explore Findings.
This week, we were extremely honored to speak to Internet intellectual Clay Shirky, writer, teacher, and consultant on the social and economic effects of Internet technologies. Clay is a professor at the renowned Interactive Telecommunications Program at NYU and author of two books, most recently Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age.
Clay is one of the foremost minds studying the evolution of Internet culture. He is also a dedicated writer and reader, and it was natural that we would ask him to contribute to our series to hear what he could teach us about social reading. Clay is both brilliant and witty, able to weave in quotes from Robert Frost in one breath and drop a “ZOMG” in the next. So sit down and take notes: Professor Shirky’s about to speak.
How is publishing changing?
Publishing is not evolving. Publishing is going away. Because the word “publishing” means a cadre of professionals who are taking on the incredible difficulty and complexity and expense of making something public. That’s not a job anymore. That’s a button. There’s a button that says “publish,” and when you press it, it’s done.
In ye olden times of 1997, it was difficult and expensive to make things public, and it was easy and cheap to keep things private. Privacy was the default setting. We had a class of people called publishers because it took special professional skill to make words and images visible to the public. Now it doesn’t take professional skills. It doesn’t take any skills. It takes a Wordpress install.
The question isn’t what happens to publishing — the entire category has been evacuated. The question is, what are the parent professions needed around writing? Publishing isn’t one of them. Editing, we need, desperately. Fact-checking, we need. For some kinds of long-form texts, we need designers. Will we have a movie-studio kind of setup, where you have one class of cinematographers over here and another class of art directors over there, and you hire them and put them together for different projects, or is all of that stuff going to be bundled under one roof? We don’t know yet. But the publishing apparatus is gone. Even if people want a physical artifact — pipe the PDF to a printing machine. We’ve already seen it happen with newspapers and the printer. It is now, or soon, when more people will print the New York Times holding down the “print” button than buy a physical copy.
The original promise of the e-book was not a promise to the reader, it was a promise to the publisher: “We will design something that appears on a screen, but it will be as inconvenient as if it were a physical object.” This is the promise of the portable document format, where data goes to die, as well.
Institutions will try to preserve the problem for which they are the solution. Now publishers are in the business not of overcoming scarcity but of manufacturing demand. And that means that almost all innovation in creation, consumption, distribution and use of text is coming from outside the traditional publishing industry.
What is the future of reading? How can we make it more social?
One of the things that bugs me about the Kindle Fire is that for all that I didn’t like the original Kindle, one of its greatest features was that you couldn’t get your email on it. There was an old saying in the 1980s and 1990s that all applications expand to the point at which they can read email. An old geek text editor, eMacs, had added a capability to read email inside your text editor. Another sign of the end times, as if more were needed. In a way, this is happening with hardware. Everything that goes into your pocket expands until it can read email.
But a book is a “momentary stay against confusion.” This is something quoted approvingly by Nick Carr, the great scholar of digital confusion. The reading experience is so much more valuable now than it was ten years ago because it’s rarer. I remember, as a child, being bored. I grew up in a particularly boring place and so I was bored pretty frequently. But when the Internet came along it was like, “That’s it for being bored! Thank God! You’re awake at four in the morning? So are thousands of other people!”
Employment in journalism has plummeted to levels by seen since the halcyon days of the early 1990s. Compiled from data gathered by the American Society of News Editors, the chart above shows newsroom staff in 2011 dropped to levels not seen in the U.S. since 1978.
Newspapers now employ 40,600 editors and reporters vs. a peak of 56,900 in the pre-Internet year of 1990, according to the census released today. Thus, newsroom headcount has fallen by 28.6% from its modern-day high.
Granted, there’s nothing particularly newsworthy about the decline of newspaper staff. And there is one bright spot. The ASNE data collection project began to track the number of journalist of color who were working at papers across the U.S. In 1979 just 3.6 percent of reporters were people of color compared to 12.3 percent in 2011. While this figure lags well behind the overall racial diversity of the American populace, it’s an indication that more than technology has changed in newsrooms.
Also not included in he data are journalism jobs at online-only shops like Gawker or Aol’s cornucopia of Internet media properties such as Huffpo and Patch. While not enough to offset industry-wide decline, there are thousands of modern journalists working full time whose last chance to see their name in print was likely time spent working for the college rag.
H/T PBS MediaShift
(Source: catbushandludicrous)
(via nyx2701)
[F. Scott Fitzgerald provided this list in a letter to his then-11-year-old daughter]
Things to worry about:
- Worry about courage
- Worry about cleanliness
- Worry about efficiency
- Worry about horsemanship
Things not to worry about:
- Don’t worry about popular opinion
- Don’t worry about dolls
- Don’t worry about the past
- Don’t worry about the future
- Don’t worry about growing up
- Don’t worry about anybody getting ahead of you
- Don’t worry about triumph
- Don’t worry about failure unless it comes through your own fault
- Don’t worry about mosquitoes
- Don’t worry about flies
- Don’t worry about insects in general
- Don’t worry about parents
- Don’t worry about boys
- Don’t worry about disappointments
- Don’t worry about pleasures
- Don’t worry about satisfactions
Things to think about:
- What am I really aiming at?
- How good am I really in comparison to my contemporaries in regard to:
(a) Scholarship
(b) Do I really understand about people and am I able to get along with them?
(c) Am I trying to make my body a useful instrument or am I neglecting it?
(via nyx2701)
(Source: jordanisfresh)
(Source: jesslyincleveland)
(via racingstripes)