Comment by keiferski

1 year ago

Reading as a mass culture phenomenon is absolutely not thousands of years old and mass literacy didn't exist in a lot of places a mere century or two ago. Even today, you'd be surprised at how most people have very basic literacy skills.

And on a cognitive level reading is superior to video or sound.

I'm pretty skeptical of that claim, but even if it's true, it doesn't really matter if reading is better than watching a video if people prefer to watch videos.

I also specifically said it's not an issue of impatience, but rather a fundamental shifting of media formats.

Why would it not matter? You think just because a mass group prefers one thing, it will have good outcomes? Will/are your kids glued to screens 24/7 because others prefer it? Seems like you may be a lost cause already.

And maybe mass literacy hasn't been around for millenia, but written form of communication and story telling certainly has.

  • It wouldn't matter because society is already orienting itself towards a screen-first world. Parents that force their kids to read books and not use screens are almost certainly a minority.

    Seems like you may be a lost cause already.

    Not sure what this is supposed to mean. I'm describing what I perceive to be a societal shift, not my personal thoughts on whether I think it's good or bad.

    • It literally matters that people fight that urge. It almost never takes a majority to turn the tide of a movement(and I am not advocating for any extremes). There needs to be some kind of balance. If a parent is "forcing" their child to read books or to be curious about the world, something has gone awry earlier on. I know plenty of parent who limit screen time, let their kids play outside, and do so themselves, but that is all anecdotal and does not represent the average experience.

      I guess it "wouldn't matter" if in 50 years everyone is just a mush brain on their couch scrolling TikTok getting fed through a brain tube. Yeah...hard to see how it "wouldn't matter".