4 ms·

Yes - well, print media has long been on the way out as we now have a better source of information - the internet. And, perhaps they also haven't been on the r

Yes - well, print media has long been on the way out as we now have a better source of information - the internet. And, perhaps they also haven't been on the receiving end of the biggest governmental media handout in history over the past 2 years. I'm talking about the coronavirus advertising campaign - billions have been paid by the government to promote their message.

pavlov 5y ago
> "we now have a better source of information - the internet" I find this is not the case for anything long-form or literary. I get much more out of 30 minutes spent reading the paper edition of the New Yorker than from spending the same time glancing through articles found on Twitter.
- verisimi 5y ago
  I know what you mean - but I genuinely read more essays/articles now than ever before. There are decent recommendations everywhere, least of all HN itself.
- derbOac 5y ago
  I do think there's something being lost online in going from print. I don't mean that in a nostalgic, wistful kind of way, I mean it in a functional, ergonomic, I want useful information kind of way. The problem is that I'm not sure how to pinpoint exactly what it is, or if it's a combination of things. Certain things I feel really confident about, but others are more like guesses. And I worry that some of that knowledge that's there in print stuff is going to be lost forever as everything transitions to the current reading UX paradigm. Ads are kind of interesting to me because people complain about them, but I've realized gradually that I liked a lot of the print ads. They were relevant and usually not intrusive. If I was reading about X, in X journal, the ads were targeted to someone reading that material in that outlet, and were there for me to see if I wanted, and if not, not. Online, they're obnoxious, intrusive, and irrelevant -- even when they are tracking me! (That last part is the worst part of it actually.) As for other stuff I'm not sure. Flipping through pages is just faster sometimes for browsing? Maybe eink would be better? But I tried that and it was slow and only would do a small fraction of what regular screens (and print) could handle. I think it's possible to duplicate print experience, maybe be even better than that and laptops/tablets/phones. I'm just not sure exactly how to it should be done. I don't miss the physical volume of material print would take up. But there are certain things about it, and how it was edited, that was better.

pavlov 5y ago

> "we now have a better source of information - the internet" I find this is not the case for anything long-form or literary. I get much more out of 30 minutes spent reading the paper edition of the New Yorker than from spending the same time glancing through articles found on Twitter.

verisimi 5y ago
I know what you mean - but I genuinely read more essays/articles now than ever before. There are decent recommendations everywhere, least of all HN itself.
derbOac 5y ago
I do think there's something being lost online in going from print. I don't mean that in a nostalgic, wistful kind of way, I mean it in a functional, ergonomic, I want useful information kind of way. The problem is that I'm not sure how to pinpoint exactly what it is, or if it's a combination of things. Certain things I feel really confident about, but others are more like guesses. And I worry that some of that knowledge that's there in print stuff is going to be lost forever as everything transitions to the current reading UX paradigm. Ads are kind of interesting to me because people complain about them, but I've realized gradually that I liked a lot of the print ads. They were relevant and usually not intrusive. If I was reading about X, in X journal, the ads were targeted to someone reading that material in that outlet, and were there for me to see if I wanted, and if not, not. Online, they're obnoxious, intrusive, and irrelevant -- even when they are tracking me! (That last part is the worst part of it actually.) As for other stuff I'm not sure. Flipping through pages is just faster sometimes for browsing? Maybe eink would be better? But I tried that and it was slow and only would do a small fraction of what regular screens (and print) could handle. I think it's possible to duplicate print experience, maybe be even better than that and laptops/tablets/phones. I'm just not sure exactly how to it should be done. I don't miss the physical volume of material print would take up. But there are certain things about it, and how it was edited, that was better.