Assuming you’ve read this far, some people out there in that vast pile of electronic haystacks otherwise known as the Internet are distressed to find that their reading habits have become scattered I wonder what Spencer and Heidi are up to.
Still with me?
Anyway, writing in a paper product people in the 20th century called a “magazine,” Nicholas Carr finds that his reading habits have gone the way of a hyperactive teenager on stimulants and that he has trouble reading actual books and longer articles. And in Slate, Michael Agger talks about some studies that show that your (lazy) brain skips large chunks of text, which means chances are you didn’t read this paragraph. That’s ok, it wasn’t a great paragraph anyway.
So what do you think? Has the Internet made it harder to read an actual book? Do you find your attention span maybe I should go check Gawker again?
Margaret Yang says
Yes, that is–
Oh look! A chicken!
John C. says
I sometimes find my reading to be more fragments, but usually only if it’s online. I still read books as I’ve always done. I guess my brain shifts gears when going from online to papyrus.
John C. says
BTW, I meant “fragmented”. Obviously the intarweb has affected my patience at proofreading my comments.
Conduit says
Interesting question. I make websites for a living, and one of the basic principles is that people skim when reading online. Wherever possible, information should be provided in bullet points.
I do feel my attention span isn’t what it once … er … where was I?
Oh, yes – which brings me back to a point I raised in the E-book debates. Is technology going to change the nature of what people read as well as how they read it? Will shorter fiction become the norm? Will writers with snappier styles fare better than those who ramble on?
Melanie Avila says
LOL, my attention-span is shorter for online articles, but not books. I cringe when people say they skim large chunks in books – the author took time with that and I think you should read it! I know writers took time with articles too, but since it took a much shorter amount of time I don’t feel bad devoting less of my time.
You didn’t read that, did you?
David says
Carr is spouting the same garbage that’s been around since Plato’s lament about the young, and probably before that. This is a modern version that attributes the supposed ongoing decline and fall of civilization to gadgets instead of the corrupting influence of outside agitators.
Carr is experiencing a problem that we all do as we get older. It’s easier to be distracted, harder to focus, more difficult even to write a longish sentence without forgetting who the subject ares.
Nathan Bransford says
Ha — ironic David, because Carr talks all about that at the end of the article. He even mentions Plato, although in the context of Socrates lamenting the written word.
Other Lisa says
I read this article a couple of days ago. Of course I can’t remember what it said but at the time it scared me.
This is really twisted but I find that I do my best novel-reading on the exercise bike at the gym. It’s like, oooh, I really want to finish that book. Better go ride the bike. I don’t know if this is connected to the splintering of my attention span or not. I’m guessing it is, and that I’ve gotten hyper enough to need the physical activity in order to focus.
Lauren says
Chicken!
Also: yes. I’ve been a, shall we say, heavy Internet user since the mid-90s. My addiction has cooled a little over the past few years, but I still find my online reading habits infecting my book reading. I’ll be reading the top of the left page, and then suddenly, I’ll find that my eyes have skipped all the way over to the bottom right page and read the last few sentences there. Or I’ll start absentmindedly flipping through the book and reading random pages in chapters I haven’t gotten to yet. I’ve spoiled more than one ending for myself that way.
Also, it’s rare that I sit down and read more than 20 or 25 pages at a time. I read a book or two a week, but I break it up more than I used to. The last marathon I did was a couple months ago — about 250 pages of Junot Diaz’s Oscar Wao in a single sitting.
Nathan Bransford says
Hey Ulysses, could you please shoot me a quick e-mail? Nothing bad, I swear!
Scott says
>Has the Internet made it harder to read an actual book?
No way! It’s just the opposite. I can get my hands on books now that I never would have known existed back in The Day. Books that I never would have known about are now a couple clicks away from my bookshelf.
On the other hand, I used to love the newspaper, but I now get most of my news online, where it is delivered in small TV-like chunks, but where I can look for more details and different perspectives on some stories that especially interest me.
jill says
Internet usage hasn’t changed my reading habits at all (except in helping me to discover new writers and books!). I read newspapers, books, magazines, blogs, emails, and websites. My husband just set up my computer with two monitors and two keyboards so I can write/surf on one and have a game running on the other.
Wait, that was probably a bad example. I often have email open in one window and assorted blogs/websites on another and switch between them while screens load. Once, I was reading a magazine and a book while doing that. It didn’t work nearly as well.
Two teenage daughters who have grown up with internet, computers, and satellite television still read every chance they get – books, newspapers, sometimes magazines — and get news and content from the internet.
The internet gives us more choices, but doesn’t have to change the way we use them.
Tiffany Kenzie says
No it’s not harder to read an actual book. It’s harder to read any blogs over 400-500 words. I find I skip them more often than not. Even if they are broken up into shorter paragraphs, I’ll skim. But, it could be because I’m at work and shouldn’t be on the net playing 🙂
Will Entrekin says
I’d say it’s a question of apples and oranges, but they’re too similar; really I think it’s a question of apples and wolverines. Sure, they’re words on either a screen or a page, but what’s really different between online reading and most other forms is function. As well as the reasons we read them. To wit: people read magazines/newspapers for much the same reason they surf the Internet and blogs. This causes redundancy, and is probably at least half the reason the circulations for magazines and newspapers has declined.
People read books for a different reason than they read magazines, though, or newspapers. It’s a far more immersive experience that blogs and the Internet have difficulty mirroring because of their unfixed nature.
So anyway, the Internet hasn’t changed the way we read so much as it’s offered a new medium for reading, which is probably analogous to changing the way one drives versus giving one a different vehicle. Which is why, as John C. notes, his brain shifts gears when going from online to papyrus.
Anonymous says
Not Really–I still follow the text left to right, top to bottom.
Luc2 says
No, internet hasn’t changed how I read. If a book is compelling I can get wrapped up in it. If a good book isn’t too long, I often am able to finish it in one go.
Internet does negatively affect my writing, however. I read the following anonymous quote somewhere:
“Being a good writer is 3% talent, 97% not being distracted by the internet.” Amen to that.
Now I must go back to watching football.
Anonymous says
I’m already getting the impression that short sentences are the preferred style. Witness Lee Child.
One agent complaimed my sentences were ‘too long’. The handwriting. Is. On. The. Wall.
Trée says
No, but it seems to change the way I write since few blog readers seem to want to read more than 500 words at a time.
beth says
I think that the internet age just helped hone my already ADD attention span. I’ve always read 3-5 books at once–I keep one or two in every room; I get bored with a chapter, I go to another book. Now, on the internet, I switch back and forth between my Mozilla Firefox tabs. It’s nothing new–it’s just technology increasing my ability to spread out my attention.
hldyer says
Hmmm… there may be something to that notion.
My last blog post was 340 words and felt REALLY long.
But that’s okay cuz it’s musical and silly. *snort*
Kirsten Hubbard says
I completely agree. The antidote? Definitely, reading books as well. As long as we continue to do both, I think we strike a balance. Unfortunately, many people don’t.
Kimber An says
Yes, but for the good. By networking in Cyber-Space, I’m aware of a lot more and different novels that I would know nothing about way out here in the Alaskan Bush otherwise. Besides not being near a real bookstore, I don’t have time for them either.
Anonymous says
It certainly fragments my ability to poofread.
JES says
Leonard Pitts (the Miami Herald columnist) wrote about this Atlantic piece recently, too.
For good or ill, I’ve always been a schizoid reader — somebody above mentioned Lee Child, whose Reacher novels I love, but I also like the slower-paced “thoughty” things like (say) Kavalier & Clay or Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norell. (Or maybe I like them only if they have ampersands in their titles.) I get different kinds of satisfaction from both kinds of material.
OTOH: There are only so many hours in a day. Which means if I spend 90 minutes on a given evening hopping around the interwebs, that’s 90 minutes less “real” reading. I find myself staying up later and later to catch up. 🙂
Anonymous says
chickens and monkeys, reading, writing, picking up e-mails, ordering lunch, sending, waiting, hovering,
more chickens, monkeys, software download, software tutorials, proofread, research, getting distracted with all those cute dog pictures,spent three hours watching u-tube clips of the mysterious Paulding Light in the Upper Peninsula…
when I have a book in my hand, the book has my whole attention.
It is relaxing, soothing, fun, good for me, quieting, and makes me think.
I actually get up in the morning and DO NOT FIRST TURN ON MY COMPUTER
so I will think about things FIRST.
Neptoon says
Aloha Nathan,
Interesting question. I still have not read a book on a screen. I do news and world events and mail and a couple of blogs (well, your blog), but for relaxing reading I seek a more traditional approach.
In fact, I like grabbing a book with paper pages and grippable bindings just to get away from my computer(s). If the book is really good my attention span matches the number of pages in the book. If I can’t finish the book in a sitting, I’m thinking about it until I can create the time to finish it. A good book can heal what ails you.
However, in my case, after yesterday, I think I might have to wait for a couple of Laker games next season against the Kings and the Warriors to heal my wounds.
My people get rather skittish and uneasy following massacres…and so this is the end to my NBA references for this year…the better TEAM won!
A’hui hou…
natalie516 says
Not at all, the only thing that has changed with time has been the amount I have available to read. In terms of the way I read I still read everything, I do not skip paragraphs or whole sentences or word.
joycemocha says
The only way the Internet’s affected how I read is that I’ve cut back on magazine and newspaper reading. Doesn’t affect how I read books, except that I hear about more books I want to read; therefore my to-read pile is bigger.
What does affect my reading style is the day job. Toward the end of the school year my brain wants more brain candy than deep stuff.
Kristin Laughtin says
Actually, I’m pretty sure college did that. I only had short amounts of time to do *anything*, and after a while, my brain wired itself to work that way. I used to have a very long attention span, but these days, I have the attention span of a gnat, and am usually multi-tasking on top of that. Even if I’m really involved in something (writing an intense scene, reading, watching a movie, whatever), I usually pause every few minutes just to look up or do something different. (As you can see, I’m now checking my Google reader between two tasks at work.)
Of course, the internet doesn’t really help, since most things on it are meant to be read quickly. But at least I don’t skim!
Just_Me says
I think the only way the internet effects my reading is how I find books and what I read. I can find books on a website that I won’t find at the chain stores nearby, that means I have a wider selection. Otherwise, no, I still sit and devour books in one sitting
1writeway says
I definitely read online material differently than I do hard copy, and I think I’m meant to. That is, as someone already mentioned, online material is meant to be read quickly, in bursts. So, when I came across Carr’s article online, I had to force myself to read about half of it. Then I emailed the article to myself, although I would prefer to read the paper version. Reading text on a computer dries out my eyes, maybe another reason why we need to keeping “moving” on the net. (Then, again, I read Jarhead on an e-book device without any problem.)
I recently found that I still have the capacity to “hunker down” with a book and become oblivious to my physical surroundings. The problem is I don’t get to do that as often as when I was a kid or in college.
And I wouldn’t blame the internet *entirely* for our shortened attention span. Just watch an hour of TV where you get maybe 4 straight minutes of content and then several 30-second bursts of advertisements.
Maybe that’s why I find power outages to be kind of blissful …
LoraliSophia says
If anything, reading more online has made me more patient in my reading of paper formatted stories.
Online, I’m more likely than not to skim because half of the stuff there is random scribblings and not very cohesive. There are exceptions, but when I am reading over, in particular, pop culture stuff, I feel my attention slipping and my eyes glazing over.
Reading off line however, I put more stock into what I’m reading because those stories actually had to go through more hoops than something that someone just randomly posted or wrote on the spur of the moment. There is also something tactile about holding a book that you are reading rather than just staring at a screen for hours.
1writeway says
I definitely read online material differently than I do hard copy, and I think I’m meant to. That is, as someone already mentioned, online material is meant to be read quickly, in bursts. So, when I came across Carr’s article online, I had to force myself to read about half of it. Then I emailed the article to myself, although I would prefer to read the paper version. Reading text on a computer dries out my eyes, maybe another reason why we need to keeping “moving” on the net. (Then, again, I read Jarhead on an e-book device without any problem.)
I recently found that I still have the capacity to “hunker down” with a book and become oblivious to my physical surroundings. The problem is I don’t get to do that as often as when I was a kid or in college.
And I wouldn’t blame the internet *entirely* for our shortened attention span. Just watch an hour of TV where you get maybe 4 straight minutes of content and then several 30-second bursts of advertisements.
Maybe that’s why I find power outages to be kind of blissful …
Arwen says
I don’t find this to be the case for me, and I also think we do have a habit of mis-attributing affects as people (see “regression to the mean”) … After all, someone was reading newsletters, almanacs, and Reader’s Digest.
I’d hazard a guess that certain sorts of readers have always skipped chunks of text, we’re just better at measuring it now; I remember in high school, a teacher reading aloud chosen sections because “people miss detail when reading to themselves”, and I know that I’ve read books a second time and have been delighted to find a hawk in the sky or a stripe in a sock that I missed the first time through.
Also, not to disparage or question either Carr or Agger specifically, but age does do things to our lives and brains. We have added time pressures and distractions; greater responsibilities and stressors; and more of a vulnerability to wandering off mid-thought…
Adaora A. says
It’s made it easier for me. I get tips in terms of the best books to read, I pick them up, then I blog about how amazing they are. The internet has only furthered my intrenched status as a book addict.
“Times are bad, children are no longer obeying their parent’s, and everyone is reading a book.” – Marc Tullius.
I love that quote so much that is graces my blog.
superwench83 says
I don’t know that it’s a good comparison, honestly. I look for shorter things to read online, and as for fiction reading online, unless I’m doing a crit for someone, I only prefer to read flash fiction online; else I want it in paper. But in novels…well, one of my favorite authors is George R.R. Martin, and his books are something like 800 pages long.
So I guess this is a long way of saying that I agree with what john c. said!
A Paperback Writer says
I’ve always been able either to fragment my attention and multitask (try watching Jonny in the back row who might be texting in his hoodie pocket while teaching a lesson on 12th night and planning the lesson on verbs for the next class — and oh, is Susan writing on the desk?) or else block out the rest of the world and read for several hours straight (Uh, NOT while I’m in the classroom).
Both are useful for me and both have been unaffected by the internet.
L.C.McCabe says
I have found that the internet cuts into the amount of time that I spend reading.
It is easy to surf the web to look up one fact and then realize that an hour and a half has elapsed and nothing much has been accomplished other than be entertained by the various websites you’ve discovered.
Internet usage means that I watch less television than ever before, and have to force myself to leave my computer in order to read books before going to bed.
I have read many long articles online, but I skim those just as readily as I have skimmed books in the past if I am looking for something in specific. The difference is that in bound publication you can check the index in the back for pertinent keywords whereas online you use the “find in this page” search.
Gwen says
Nope, I still have a fabulous attention span when I am reading something interesting. I tend to get really drawn into a book… you know, really involved mentally and emotionally.
When it comes to textbooks, though… well, I’m known to skim rather than read properly.
Anonymous says
Yes. Definitely yes. This rapid-fire consumption of information I find myself practicing throughout the day (message boards, news websites, agent blogs) has retarded my attention span for novels.
I can reverse the damage of course, but it’s going to take some work. First thing to do is…
what was the question?
Kiersten says
Loved the way you wrote this, Nathan. Wonderful.
But while I frequently skim blog posts (never yours, of course), I don’t think it has affected my normal reading.
Isabelle Santiago says
This might be a loaded question. Mostly because I find reading things online is difficult due to the many distractions. My attention is in eight different places at once. -An IM conversation – an open manuscript – email – catching up on blogs – etc, etc. So reading an ebook or an article can be difficult if it gets too long. My attention starts to sway.
Paper/print is different. I get a book and I devour it. I’m hungry for more. Which is why I think e-readers are growing in popularity. Similar concept. Helps us focus on what’s in front of us, not everything around us.
Betty Atkins Dominguez says
Sometimes yes and sometimes no, well, mostly yes, that is when reading a paper book, I tend to skip
then again, makes it hard to edit a hard copy of someone’s manuscript, much prefer editing on-screen
so, what was the question?
Gabrielle says
Nope. I still read books easily. I’m actually reading “Atonement” right now, which is as unbloglike as possible. It has the rare effect of making me love the book and not like a single character. (Robbie’s all right, but that’s just because James McAvoy plays him in the movie.)
Anonymous says
After spending the last year spending much of my time doing internet research and writing, I’m finding it very hard to pick up a book and start reading it. It’s the first time in my life that I’m not “always reading a book;” but the worst evidence of this trend is what I see in my two teenagers, once avid book readers and now glued to their computer screens for their social lives, homework, entertainment… I think it’s a really huge problem.
spyscribbler says
Yes, yes, YES! Not only has it changed my reading, but because I write fiction to be read on the internet, I’ve noticed that my voice has become … internet-y.
Short paragraphs. Short sentences. Fewer commas.
I was actually wondering: do you find paragraphs are getting shorter in the submissions you receive? Is the internet affecting writing style, too?
Gail says
I’m not sure this is what you meant — I still read only paper — but oh, my goodness, my ability to buy obscure books for myself and to find the books I loved as a child for my children to read is easy as pie now. Where I used to have to track them down by phone in used bookstores all over the country and pay a fortune to have them sent to me, I google them now and Amazon sends them to me for pennies.
Bethanne says
I just read my seventh Brenda Joyce book in 10 days… so no. I don’t think so.
Will I read an article online when there are pictures to suffice? NO!
Icarus says
I don’t find that remotely accurate for me.
Lisa says
The screen vs the page issue is complicated by what else besides letters are on either screen or page. As I write this, I notice the computer dock and the bookmark toolbar running across and up and down my screen with all the various icons involved. Then the actual website, with tiny photos and different colors and symbols. Different categories and types of information – some I expect and want to see, some of which are irrelevant and need to be ignored.
No wonder it’s difficult for some people to concentrate and not skim or jump around the screen. I read a great deal of short fiction online, but nothing will ever replace having a book in my hand, and the tactile pleasure of turning a page. It is also relaxing for the reason the computer screen is agitating – generally speaking, the only things on a paper page are letters and occasional numbers. It’s easier to settle down, to concentrate – you aren’t required to make sense of anything that appears unexpected on the computer screen.