This morning, I read a report on technology device ownership in 2015; it is published by the Pew Research Center and based on the Center’s research. If their data on changes in device ownership can be relied upon as forecast tool, smart phones will largely overtake e-book readers in the near term.
In early 2014, the percentage of U.S. adults who owned e-book readers was about 32%. The research just reported shows a sharp decline to just 19%. At the same time, smart phone ownership has climbed from 35% in 2011 to 68% today, with 89% of 18 to 29 year olds owning the devices today.
I am, at times, a research junkie; I look at such data and attempt to forecast the future. Yet my attempts to use data to make predictions inevitably leads to looking for more information. So it is this morning. After reading the study I mentioned above, I sought information on trends in the format of book consumption. While e-readers seem to be losing their prominence to smart phones among those who consume books electronically, print remains the primary format for books; at least it held primacy in 2013, according to the Pew Research Centers report on the subject, released in 2014. According to Pew, 76% of Americans read at least one book during 2013; out of that group, 69% read a print version, while 28% read an e-book.
If I look strictly at data, I might assume the future of print books is bleak, but that future will play out more slowly than others have suggested. The changes from print to electronic books are taking place, but they are not taking place at the blazing speed I once imagined. Yet the figures for older people skew figures for the whole population. The younger readers, ages 18 to 49, were much more likely to have read an e-book in 2013 than younger readers; between 32% and 37%, versus 28% for the population at large.
I was a bit surprised that youngest readers (ages 18-29) were a little more likely to have read at least one book during the year than were the next most voracious reading group, those aged 50 to 64, 77% of whom read at least one book.
The bottom line? Hell, I don’t know! The data can be interpreted almost any way I might want; but the truths buried in them are hard to uncover. My sense is that readership, in general, is falling and will continue to fall in the U.S.A. Of those who read, most will continue to prefer print books for a while, but the convenience of, and improvements in, technology, probably will make e-books more and more attractive to larger and larger numbers of readers. The shift to print-on-demand, which has already taken place, will continue to reduce high-volume print runs of all but the most popular best-sellers. Authors will increasingly rely on royalties from electronic versions of their works, versus royalties from print sales. I expect electronic versions of books to increase in price, though not substantially; the reason is this: the almost infinitesimal royalties from e-book sales cannot sustain a writer, even a popular writer (unless I misunderstand electronic royalties, which is entirely possible).
It’s all speculation. That’s all it is. I’m a speculator. At least it causes me to think.
Well, they’re reading; they’re just not reading any quality material. It’s humorous to watch students walking down the breezeways or hallways with nearly never looking up from their i-phones. They’re usually checking out Twitter, Instagram, Kick, Tumblr, though surprisingly more are dropping out of FB, claiming it’s more for those with teen- children than teen children themselves. Twitter and Instagram appear to be the craze lately, perhaps suggesting that FB is now becoming a phenomena of the past. Admittedly, Instagram and Twitter deliver “faster return” than FB, though they are equally as one dimensional.
But the reading is lite. Where in the past we might see someone trip and fall from having his nose too deeply tucked in Robbins’ “Carpetbaggers,” today I’ve seen students on instagram walk nearly half way down a lawn before realizing they’re off the sidewalk. The path to literacy is as dilute as a speak-easy whiskey and water on the rocks.
Yes. Parents are to blame — center management of home-life gone to shit; classroom education is too formulaic; jazzy teaching frowned upon — not efficient; libraries have gone minimal on pull-out books, but more viral about databases; blog research has become a bad habit in college — you can hardly verify the material, though when grading composition papers I know I’m bound to find some reference to sparknotes or some goofy blog. I’ve had students actually citing a blog on Willa Cather’s “Paul’s Case” written by a 15 year old boy.
The literary world, the reading environment that surrounds our students is no more than two feet deep — the kiddie pool, so to speak.
Interesting perspective, Juan, and one I didn’t consider. I think you’re probably right about the role of poverty and many millennials’ attempt to emerge from it; that might help explain the focus on financial gain which, in turn, could account for the diminution of idealism.
But while those factors may contribute to the decline of literacy, I think there’s more to it than that. The value of independent, critical, analytical thinking does not seem to be stressed as much in society in general today as it was while I was growing up. In fact, discussions of literacy and its role in enabling thought seem to have all but disappeared. Who’s to blame? Parents. Public policy makers involved in elementary through high school education. The media. And shifts in society that, I think, give children too much latitude in what they learn.
There are movements afoot, and have been for some time, that promote giving children the freedom to grow and develop entirely naturally, without being subjected to the rigidity of an educational system that defines and teaches basic expectations. While I’m not a fan of teaching to tests, I believe kids (and adults) have to be exposed to fundamental education to make them productive adults. Reading and basic math are two of those fundamentals. While I’m not in the classroom and haven’t been in years, my perception is that the fundamentals are given short shrift. Part of that, I think, may be due to an inappropriate reaction to “authoritarianism” in the classroom. I believe teachers should demand, and be given, respect. But parents and society at large seem to want to turn the tables, giving kids the respect and leaving the teacher out of the equation. Discipline is difficult to define, for me, but I know it when I see it; teachers should not have to sacrifice their ability to teach in order to demonstrate they are sensitive to the special needs of little psychotic Johnny.
I’m rambling. I have a lot more to say, but I’ll slow it down here to catch my breath and see how you respond.
Honestly, I just don’t know, John. I’m having a glass of Jameson on the Rocks as I write this (wish I was on fb now), so I think I may be better at “being plain” here.
In fact, I would prefer a dialogue over this if you don’t mind? I don’t think I could give one, succinct position or answer.
Our middle class generation as college students were more literate with books (tactile) — yes — but we were not a majority who attended college as this Millennial generation is. We were actually a few. I imagine that your parents were middle class as mine were and that college (given we were post-war children) was expected. We looked good because we were literate, or at least were expected to be.
New millennial is a composite of poverty and traditional Americana middle class. So, it gets complicated. What’s comparatively missing (I feel) is that bunch like you and me who did majors for some whimsical, principled ideal. Today, many degree seekers (mostly from the impoverished classes) are about monetary success, and so their interests are bent on ideals more concrete – not even idealistic.
Idealism really requires a broad sense of literacy when you think about it.
What say you?
I agree literacy is a huge problem, Juan. And it’s getting worse. Even people who are able to get through a sentence, though, are not necessarily capable of thinking critically about what the sentence means. Ach! I am full of paranoia and gloom, as I think you are. The problem, of course, is that our senses are warranted.
I’ll write more later on this, but we see a problem with literacy in our college classrooms. People don’t read; hence, I don’t dare ask anyone to read aloud in fear that they could not read a word, John.