John C. Dvorak on ebooks

In his 4/21/11 post "The End of the Printed Book?" Dvorak seems to agree with me:  ("I don't like the idea that the printed book might be killed off by a combination of the Kindle and the iPad, but I think, on a short-term basis, we may see what looks like a trend in this direction.")

But he also points out a couple caveats about the move from printed to digital books:  1) We really don't know whether or how we perceive and retain information differently between the two formats, and  2) ebooks don't have any "collectors' value" as printed books do.


Re. the latter, I don't for a moment believe all print books are going to disappear, or even that publishing of new ones will cease altogether.  There will always be (well, "always" is a very long time) people who collect printed books and thus have a personal print library, and I suspect that even after it is no longer profitable for publishers to publish new books in print, print-on-demand will be in place to allow those few who wish and can afford to purchase them in print to be able to.

Finally: library ebooks on your mobile device

I love to read but I can't afford to buy books at anything like the rate I read them. I also live in a pretty small flat and simply don't have room for a growing personal library. These are just two of the reasons I love public lending libraries. However, now that I have a good mobile ebook reader (an iPod touch, perhaps someday an iPad or its equivalent), I'm becoming hooked on  1) the convenience of downloading books directly to my device (no trips to the library to check out/in), and  2) the convenience of being able to take my book with me whenever I'm "out" in such a small, light form factor.

I've been waiting years for this to happen, and it looks as though it may actually come to pass: we may be able to check out ebooks from our public library and read them on our mobile devices. Actually, that's been possible for a few years now. But between the ebook "format wars," the variety of mobile devices and their capabilities (supported formats, displays, downloading techniques, etc.), and the relative dearth of ebooks available in the libraries, it hasn't really been much of a viable alternative to driving to the library to check out--and in--print volumes.

It looks as though that's about to change. Amazon has announced that it's partnering with Overdrive (which has already been working with libraries to enable ebook lending) to make Kindle ebook lending by libraries possible: "Amazon Kindle to open up to library lending." (LA Times) This matters primarily because, as the Christian Science Monitor puts it, "With an estimated 7.5 million Kindles in the US, Amazon enjoys a two-thirds share of the $1 billion digital-book market, according to Forrester Research. Amazon’s new Kindle Lending Library feature will open the floodgates to e-lending." Kindle books--readable via the Kindle app on non-Kindle portable devices, too (thank you Amazon!)--are sort of the 800-pound gorilla of ebooks these days.

Oh, I'm not going to get too excited yet. This has only been announced, not implemented, and according to the LA Times article, Amazon "...did not specify when its "Kindle Library Lending" program would start."  It may be some time before my San Diego County Library system has it in place, and awhile after that before they start buying new books in Kindle format--assuming, of course, they have the money in these days of decimated budgets. (Which brings up another conundrum for libraries: how to allocate pittance new-book budgets between print and digital, not to mention between book and media.)


But eventually there will be enough ebooks you can download to your portable device for free from the public library system that more people will be doing that than will be physically visiting the libraries and checking out (and in) dead-tree editions. When that tipping point has been passed, there will be increasing pressure to close libraries. For a number of reasons the prospect greatly saddens me, but unfortunately I won't be surprised to see it happen in my lifetime.

"Digital" or "Information" Literacy?

Two Teacher Librarian (TL) colleagues who attended a recent CSLA (Calif. School Library Assoc.) Southern Section Workshop related that the current CSLA Vice President Governmental Relations is urging us to switch from using the term "information literacy" to "digital literacy."  Evidently the rationale is that new California government education initiatives are using "digital."   By our using the same term, it will make it more clear that one of the unique value-added services TLs bring to a school, teaching students to find, evaluate, and use information from a variety of sources, is exactly what these initiatives refer to.

That makes sense, but it also brings to mind two other reactions:

1. "Digital" immediately brings to my mind online--or at least onscreen.  If "digital" literacy is a new priority in education, does that leave the broader "information" literacy behind in the dust?  Does this suggest that print information sources--e.g. books and magazines--are no longer a priority... or even important?  If so, is it because print sources are being abandoned as our students (and their under-30 older brothers & sisters) get their information exclusively online/onscreen... and is this a tacit recognition of that trend?
2. I mentioned the switch to my wife, who while not an educator is nevertheless college-educated and highly intelligent and well-read.  Her response was (roughly), "'Digital literacy' sounds like being able to operate all kinds of modern technology, from computers to DVD players and DVRs to knowing how to use your cell phone and set the time and alarm on a clock or watch.  Everything's digital these days."  Not exactly the same thing as what we have been calling "information literacy."

Reflections on "Googled: The End of the World As We Know It" (by Ken Auletta)

I've just finished reading Auletta's book and couldn't help but noting some impressive facts he cites which you might find interesting as well.  For perspective, the book was published in 2009, probably toward the end of that year as he writes of events in mid-2009.  Bolding and italics in quoted segments are mine...

• "By early 2009 there were an estimated 25.2 billion Web pages."
  [By the way, if you began building a stack of sheets of regular paper like you'd put in your printer or copier, by the time you had just one billion sheets the stack would be over 66 miles high.]
• "...[T]he several hundred million daily searches Google performed in 2003 (today the number is 3 billion)..."
  [4 billion/day now, in early 2011?  More?]
• "By May 2009, Nielsen reported that 230 million Americans had Internet access, 93 percent [of those 230 million, I assume] had high-speed access (broadband) and digital cable service, and 228 million used a mobile phone."
  [230 million out of what, are we at 300 million now?  I didn't realize Internet access penetration in America was nearly that high.]
• "...[A]ccording to a 2007 study by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), when adjusted for inflation, money spent to purchase books 'has fallen dramatically... Nearly half of all Americans ages 18 to 24 read no books for pleasure,' the study found, and the percentage of those 18 to 44 who read books was sliding.  It is true that the following year, 2008, the NEA reported a modest increase in reading.  But if one asked publishers, or educators, whether they had high hopes for the expansion of book reading, few would say yes."
• "According to an Annenberg Center study, the average American family classified as poor spent $180 a month on media services--mobile [does this include voice service or just Internet data?], broadband, digital TV, satellite TV, iTunes, and the like--that did not exist a generation ago, and the average American household spends $260 per month.
  [Wow, I'm behind the poor!  $75 for two mobile non-smart phones (my wife's and mine, voice and text only), $40 for high-speed broadband Internet, $15 for the cheapest Cox cable TV (analog) available.]

Definitely not the world of our childhoods, and it doesn't bode well for the future of printed ("dead-tree edition") books.