Comments on: The Twilight of Print

By: Gerry McGovern

Gerry McGovern — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 10:09:18 +0000

Thanks for all the comments. I still read lots of books myself, and, in fact, I’ve just published one! I was being a bit provocative.
I find in a lot of organizations an automatic assumption that if it’s created already for print, in Excel or PowerPoint, or whatever, then all you have to do is put it up on the Web.
Sure, we will always have print. But the Web is an excitng space for those who can truly adapt to its challenges and opportunities.

By: David Reich

David Reich — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 01:43:43 +0000

Gerry, I think Sulzberger retracted or “clarified” his comments about The Times eventually not having a print edition.
But more important, I think, is that good writing is good writing, whether in print or online. The style of writing should fit the medium, the audience and the message. Some vehicles call for flowery prose, while others need crisp and succint. (I’ve seen plenty of blogs that drone on and say in 500 words what can be said in 200 well-written words.)
Writing for online media can have the distinct advantage of
links. But not every reader will want or need to refer to the linked information. Like the Sunday New York Times (both print and online editions), it’s nice to know that all the news that’s fit to print is there, even if you choose not to read it all.

By: Elaine Fogel

Elaine Fogel — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:09:44 +0000

I think there will always be a place for the printed word. Reading long copy on a screen is not as easy, especially for aging eyes and people with certain disabilities.
Research shows that only 11% of e-mail readers read entire e-mails – most skim the content. Although e-mails are typically not novels or news, these results may give us a glimpse into the comprehension level of screen readers.
There’s something comforting about turning pages in a suspense novel, poring over a full-length op-ed article or expose, or highlighting passages in a textbook for an upcoming exam. Maybe these experiences will become nonexistent in another generation, but for now, a lot of people still like print.

By: Tammy Strnatka

Tammy Strnatka — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:01:20 +0000

I agree with Ann and Maureen. If you are a web writer and have previously been a print writer perhaps your blog applies to that situation only, but not towards writing as a whole.
Multi-channel marketing is the backlash of web only thinking. People want to read catalogs, they want their magazines, and I know a lot of people who love their newspapers.
So I would be cautious about saying print writing is entirely archaic. People don’t change as fast as technology.

By: Ann Handley

Ann Handley — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:30:20 +0000

It seems to me that the “print is dead” mantra and “write for the Web” philosophy plays particularly well for certain kinds of writing — like annual reports, corporate web sites, company-produced content, and the like. But I can’t, for example, foresee a day when products that rely on good writing — The New Yorker, for example — ever “write for the Web,” even if they cease to have an actual print publication.
Newspapers like the NY Times are vulnerable to the Web for reasons other than their writing approach. Newspapers are having their lunch eaten on so many fronts — from bloggers to Craigslist — that Arthur is wise to not cling to his paper’s print vehicle. The bottom line is that print newspaoers no longer *make sense* as a way to deliver information.

By: Maureen Rogers

Maureen Rogers — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:19 +0000

Gerry – I agree that reading for information will move increasingly to the web, where it will be bulletized and truncated. But as long as there are still people who read for pleasure and for greater understanding of some topic or, in the case of literature, about life, there’ll be print of some sort or other.As a reader, I sure hope so.
(Maybe you can boil most plots down to “boy meets girl/boy loses girl/boy gets girl back”. So you have some fundamental information on what happens, but you really don’t gain all that much understanding or pleasure out of it.)