Steve Jobs Was Only Half-Right: People Do Read - Even Kids - They Just Do It Online
When Amazon introduced their e-book reader, the Kindle, Steve Jobs made a strong proclamation regarding the book industry that received a lot of attention: "It doesn't matter how good or bad the product is, the fact is that people don't read anymore... The whole conception is flawed at the top because people don't read anymore." As it turns out, he was only half-right. People read, even those in the younger generation, they just prefer to do it online.
Although Jobs' statement at the time, was that "Forty percent of the people in the U.S. read one book or less last year," the real figure is closer to 27 percent, based on an August 2007 survey by Ipsos Public Affairs for The Associated Press (cited in The New York Times).
However, in general terms, Jobs was speaking towards a growing trend in the print industry. It's not that people don't read anymore - of course, many still do - it's just that today's young generation of consumers, and Jobs' future customers, aren't bothering to read "offline media" - that is books, magazines, or newspapers.
Newspapers
A recent comScore Plan Metrix study backs this up, finding that young news readers are less likely to read printed newspapers. In fact, those that are between 18 and 24 are 38 percent more likely than average to NOT read a newspaper during a typical week. However, non-newspaper readers are heavy news consumers - in fact, they read a lot, they just prefer to get their news online, and not just from online newspaper web sites, like WSJ.com, but also from TV News brands (like CNN and FoxNews) and Internet News brands (like Digg and Topix).
“Non-newspaper readers are a particularly important segment to reach because they are heavier than average news consumers – they just prefer to consume it in a digital format,” says Jack Flanagan, executive vice president of comScore.
Magazines
Again, overall, the magazine industry is doing OK, except when it comes to young readers. On March 6th, members of the magazine publishing industry held a MediaTel seminar where the challenges of their industry were discussed. The problem is not in readership decline, it seems, but in teen readership decline.
Duncan Edwards, chief executive of National Magazine Company, said that, despite a slight down-turn in actively purchased magazines by 1.1 per cent, the print magazine industry still generates huge profits.
However, MediaTel managing director Derek Jones said the industry must find new ways of engaging with the teen market which has suffered a steady decline in sales. The problem, according to ShortList chief executive Mike Soutar, is that the younger generation like to consume media for free and they have come to expect free content through online extensions.
Books
In 2004 the U.S. Department of Education asked 17-year-olds "How often do you ... read for fun on your own time?" With no limitation specified on where or how this reading was done, 19% replied "Never or hardly ever", more than double the 1984 rate of 9%. Since online reading wasn't specified, the kids probably took this to mean, "how often do you read books?" Still, the figure should not be dismissed as it highlights the decline of offline reading activities.
The study found also that as kids enter high school and adolescence they tend to read less often, and their reading skills stagnate or worsen compared with teens of previous years. In 2003, only 4% of American high-school graduates who did not earn college degrees could be called "proficient" readers.
Yikes.
The Flip Side
Some, like Steve Johnson of the Guardian, says that reports of reading decline doesn't take into consideration the amount of reading we doing on our computers every day. He counters a recent NEA report "To Read or Not to Read," which details the decline of literacy in the U.S.
Johnson writes, that it "raises an interesting question: if people are reading less, why haven't [standarized test] scores dropped more dramatically?" He goes on to point out that a recent British Library study of onscreen research activities found that "new forms" or reading are emerging...like "power browsing," a habit of the new "digital natives."
He concludes that "the only reason the intellectual benefits are not measurable is that they haven't been measured yet. There have been almost no studies that have looked at the potential positive impact of electronic media."
Meanwhile, Sunil Iyengar of the NEA and Mark Bauerlin, formerly of the NEA, say that Johnson ignores some of the study's findings, like the fact that "non-required" reading (picking up a book for the fun of it) is down 7% since 1992 for all adults, and 12% for 18-24 year olds. They claims that Johnson chooses to look only at other findings that support his opinion.
They point out that, sure, "new forms of reading" may exist, but it's not a good thing: the study claims that "from undergraduates to professors, people exhibit a strong tendency towards shallow, horizontal, 'flicking' behavior in digital libraries. Power browsing and viewing appear to be the norm for all ... Society is dumbing down."
Iyengar and Bauerlin even cite that there is evidence of damage linked with excessive viewing and surfing - enough sufficient data, in fact, which led the American Academy of Pediatrics to advise parents to keep children's rooms free of electronic media.
Conclusion
So is a diet of only digital media bad? With today's youngest generations being some of the first to be raised in a world where the internet and computers are as common as TVs and microwaves ovens, it will take more time to thoroughly examine the side effects, if any, of an all-digital lifestyle. However, successes like those of the Harry Potter books, show that even now, kids will read print media if it's good enough and captures their interest. And in the meantime, whether they read online or off, isn't it just good enough that they are, in fact, reading?
Share
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Nice article.
I agree, before saying that kids are reading less we should keep in mind all what they are reading online.
On the other hand, "usually" the value of reading a whole book is not the same as reading news or online magazines, right? And I don't think kids are reading books online...
Great article Sarah. I always get into these debates with some of my Political Science and English major friends who like to say that no one is reading anymore. I always tell them that even though I don't read novels I read just as much if not more than they do through online sources. Throughout college the same debate raged. I wonder if reading novels is really better for you than reading online source about current events in terms of stretching your mind.
My 'gut feeling' thoughts exactly...good to hear them supported with data!
I'm a great example of the digital native (though I haven't been a teen for some time, I was an early net adopter in the early 90's when I actually was a teen). Like you mentioned, I hardly ever read books. Probably only about one or two a year, and even then they're typically non-fiction as opposed to 'literature'. Magazines? Only during flights.
Despite that, I scored a perfect 6/6 GMAT writing score, and my while I forget the specific verbal vs. quantitative, my overall was in the 97th percentile.
Granted, one could argue I'm missing out on the cultural value associated with great literary works, however because I tend to lean toward heavier reading (quality news, science, etc) I don't think I'm missing out too much with regards to developing or maintaining my reading ability. And because of blogs, forums, and email, I probably write several dozen pages worth of text each week, which is probably more than many members of previous generations can claim!
I seem to recall everyone (well, loads) of people getting a little hot under the collar regarding txt'ing and how the "young uns" were losing the ability to face-to-face socialise because they were on their mobiles all the time. What is txt'ing if it's not reading?
Maybe what Steve Jobs is commenting upon is that people don't read like they used to (with a slight, "Grrr, young uns eh!"). And he's probably correct as this awesome article points out.
Can I also ask that when these types of sweeping articles are posted that it is clearly stated from which country the data and opinions are coming from. To be fair Sarah does a much better job than most but there's still some assumed locations - do people (young or old) read more or less in say Sweden, India or New Zealand.
This is the WORLD wide web, after all :-)
In my opinion Reading is one of the only necessary skills; and too many people can not do it correctly. It's directly linked to being able to write and communicate to others effectively.
I believe ye olde t'interwebs are both helping and hindering how someone understands data, and from that information. It's extremely helpful to use hyperlinks to flow between information, especially if you need to find specific interest points, but it hinders as you haven't had the full picture as the author intended.
We still write as a magazine would be put together, or printed article would be put together. It needs to 'slightly' change:
An article now should be constructed with an executive summary (less than 100 words, preferably less than 255 charcaters), and links to directly related information. If the entire article if covering a range of different topics, then it should be split into different posts. The entire Article length should not be more than two pages of A4. Otherwise it's rambling and should be split across more than one article.
This would allow the author to put his main point across sufficiently, with the reader having understanding.
This would then mean we can all read, write and communicate correctly!
..... Finally, an article should also have the ability for it to have a BLOODY print button. I have said it before, and I am going to say it a hundred more times, "My eyes are not what they used to be. Looking at screens all day has not helped them out at all.. let me print easily to recyclable paper so I can read it without having a bright light behind the words!"
:)
It is hard to keep my kids' supply of books. They read avidly and rapidly. They consume books like there is no tomorrow. They have little by little also moved on to reading online, but they main staple is printed media.
I think this is a really silly conversation.
Yes, we still read. It's just that we have more mediums offering us reading material..that's all.
Your first para summarized it all: "It's not that people don't read anymore - of course, many still do - it's just that today's young generation of consumers, and Jobs' future customers, aren't bothering to read "offline media" - that is books, magazines, or newspapers."
I had a boring perspective on this exact subject, if you please..Silly things on my mind today
Reading books (fiction or non-fiction) is much different than reading on the web (short articles, news, texting, email, comments, etc).
And 22-35 year olds are reading fewer and fewer books. Reading fiction is being replaced by multimedia story-telling (on the web, TV, movies, elsewhere).
I asked Steve Jobs about your post, and he said that people don't read posts that long any more.
No, I'm not criticizing the post...
@Mike R. Good point, re: "world" wide web. I'll keep that in mind for the future. :)
Yes, I read the Newspaper and news online, but I have become a big Science and non-fiction reader now.. I find myself buying books and looking for used book stores or the local library....So, on the weekends. I am reading more then ever beofore...
The secrete about the internet is that you need to know how to read to use it... Or else, it's not that important..
Big Frank
Downey, California
fxm65@yahoo.com
I've been trying to send a trackback, but it hasn't been working for some reason or another.
Please see my response and elaboration on this post here: Message of the Online Medium: Transliteracy, the Global Village, and the Rise of Networked Individualism.
Great post, lots to think about! Thanks :)
Be well,
Jenny
Jez, the print button is on the To Do list (admittedly been on there for a while, so I'll try and hurry it along!)
The most of the book reading in the future will happen on the mobile phone as for better or for worse book reading has to compete with the other mobile snacking activities (email, mobile games etc.). Give people a mobile reading capable phone (e.g. iPhone) and great reading tool (e.g. www.textonphone.com for iPhone book reading) and people will quickly replace their other mobile snacking activities with the book reading.
I have read more books on my iPhone via www.textonphone.com since I've got my iPhone than in years. People really love book reading, it is just that there has to be a reading tool at hand in those rare moments when people actually have time to read.
If you have iPhone and are stuck on bus station, train or like night reading in the bed, give www.textonphone.com a try and see if it'll change your view on the future of reading.
It is incorrect by several orders of magnitude to suggest that print reading has simply been transfered to digital and online content. 50 years ago very few people ever read a book outside of school. Most males never wrote anything outside of an application form (it was the females who kept up with family correspondence. My mother's lettrs are typical, very short, on small pieces of paper and with a fairly simple vocabulary. 50 years ago less than 10% of the population had any education beyond high school and reading habits reflected this situation.
Since the 1970's the portion attending higher education increased substantially and for a while reading and writing rates also increased. The number of magazines and there variety exploded during this period.
During the computer age reading has continued to increase as the computer is itself a reading and writing medium. It is true that book consumption are declining from there historically abnormally high levels of the 1980's and 1990's.
I am someone who owns thousands of books and have always been a big "reader" but I am sure I am not alone in being able to say that I have never read as much during my life as in recent years. I am not foolish enough to want to consume my news on dead trees any more, and I have abandoned local newspapers for better quality international news services. I enjoy audible books on my iPod and research individual subjects with great depth online from many sources.
I know how common this new form of reading is nowadays and rare big "readers" were just a few decades ago. it is a wonderful change. I feel sorry for Steve Jobs if he is surrounded by people who do not read, although I suspect that he and his friends actually read more than they did back in the 70's. They just don't read printed books anymore.
One of the biggest problems with Steve Jobs' claim is that, even if it was right, it assumes that the younger generation will always be the way it is now. That's just not the case. As people get older and settle in, things like reading become more important to them. That's a pattern I don't see changing anytime soon.
Good article. As I reflect on my own reading growing up... as a latch key kid, I did watch way too much TV. Yet, having a parent read with me would have changed that. I read almost every night with one of my boys and I catch them reading stuff on their own. I think a variety of reading is good (following a book to the end, reading a kids mag, articles online, etc). We challenge our ids to take the AR tests in class when they finish a book and celebrate when they hit 100% of their goal set by their teacher. I have only a few major requirements for my kids (as long as they are under my watch)... and one is that they read well. Think of the limits in life if you do not.
Good article. As I reflect on my own reading growing up... as a latch key kid, I did watch way too much TV. Yet, having a parent read with me would have changed that. I read almost every night with one of my boys and I catch them reading stuff on their own. I think a variety of reading is good (following a book to the end, reading a kids mag, articles online, etc). We challenge our kids to take the AR tests in class when they finish a book and celebrate when they hit 100% of their goal set by their teacher. I have only a few major requirements for my kids (as long as they are under my watch)... and one is that they read well. Think of the limits in life if you do not.
Stunning article. The numbers shocked me. I read a lot (books, paper articles, etc and of course webpages), but seem to be one of the people that will go extinct soon... I was wondering what this implies for companies. Are people reading less and less reports, memo's, etc. inside organizations too? Looking around in the company I work for, I'd say 'yes'.