OPEN

Charles Arthur vs. Jeff Jarvis: Guardianista show-down

Charles Arthur is taking Jeff Jarvis to task about his idea that books are doomed.

His argument is based on (1) hardware limitations: reading on paper is faster and will be until we have all text in HD 200 dpi on screens; and (2) humanware limitations: when we read online we’re active, and the downside of that is that our butterfly minds like to flit about the place.

So true – there are just too many options to find out more and go off at tangent when you’re online.

Sometimes I actually get slightly irritated with myself when half an hour through trying to read a lengthy article or post I find my screen filled with three browser windows, each laden with fifteen tabs, four One Note windows (three of clip and one of notes), a graphics programme (to edit them) and a blog editor all.open – I’m trying to read 45 things at once, write two blog posts, add some "check out this site in more depth" notes to my to do list and send a few mails to people who would be interested in the original article. Think of it as a well intentioned connector meltdown.

I agree with Charles Arthur and I hope he’s right. Books have a really important complementary place in my reading habits despite. Newspapers maybe I don’t need, but books are here to stay in my life.

Oh no, don’t let that mean I’m a dinosaur, though…

Tags: , charlesarthur,

Antony Mayfield

One response to “Charles Arthur vs. Jeff Jarvis: Guardianista show-down”

  1. Niall Cook Avatar
    Niall Cook

    Is it just me bored with all this “old media is dead” rubbish?

    Regardless of what we might like to think, technological advances are almost always evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Sure, the speed of change is getting quicker, but most of the things the doom-mongers are saying are dead will still be around long after we’ve gone.

Leave a Reply