The Huffington Post reprinted J.A. Konrath's humorous blog post on the (presumed and eventual) death of the print industry. I'm amused by the comments, many of which seem to assume that if you're not reading paper books, you're illiterate and a victim of the educational system-- as if there were somehow something innately less literate about reading words on a screen. There are also the usual comments about the (supposed) superiority of the print-reading experience. For example:
"I tried to use Kindle, and it's crap. To the extent that 'print is dead,' it's because of the dwindling population of people who are willing to invest the time in reading, and who need so much more stimulation than their own semi-literate imaginations can provide."
"videogaming has replaced reading for this generation.
combined with the current education budget slashing policy
we are producing a generation of illiterate incompetents" (The Kindle doesn't play videogames, dude.)
"I have no use for an e-reader. I love books too much." (Psssttt. Ebooks are books.)
"I'll never get a kindle. To me there is just something about holding a book and reading it. I love the feel, the look and even the smell :-) Yep, I'm a hardcore reader." (I'm a hardcore reader too. That's why I got a Kindle.)
"Print books won't become obsolete until your e-reader can charge itself after a few minutes in the sun. Until then, the need for no electricity will remain a strong advantage print books hold." (Someone apparently never heard that the Kindle's charge lasts for up to two weeks.)
Also, this little exchange cracked me up. Reader, extolling the virtues of print: "Print doesn't have commercials & pop ups & links & batteries & recharging & other distractions."
Konrath's response: "Which is why you're reading this article on a newspaper."