Popular Mechanics has an interesting take on the pirating of Harry Potter and other books. They point out that the printed word on some manner of paper is pretty much the best way to present text, along the way reminding us that all the technologies that have evolved to digitize the process have yet to match the intangibles that are related to reading a book. I noticed Thinking Stick had a similarly themed post to this one, so here is my take/addition.
I too am an advocate of the digital word – it’s easy and fast to manipulate, but it requires power. We know that because it’s not permanent, there seems to be a different respect accorded to it. It might also be because the digital word is now more associated with work and the printed word with leisure that will ensure that the printed word survives. It might be this or some other reason, but I agree with the PM article… there isn’t much for book publishers to worry about when it comes to piracy – it’s going to take a long time to make a dent and because (even if it’s Harry Potter) it take at least an afternoon to get through a book, the time involved in enjoying the spoils of piracy is far far more than what it takes to get it in the first place. Compare this with a 2 minute song, 2h movie or several hundred images that can all be consumed in short order and with little investment.
On the other hand, I think newspapers, with bite sized articles that can be consumed often in the blink of an eye, are a print based media that should worry… maybe John Brattlle’s got the idea about it here…
Leave a Reply