Even though I have been reading the Courier News as an online subscriber for many months now, I sometimes wake up and start for the door to go get the paper off the porch. Instead, I have to sit down in front of a device that cost several hundred dollars to read it. And when the device fails, as it did last week, I have to pay more than $100 to get it going again.
Reading the newspaper is just one of my habits that has changed since print media folks started vaunting "digital platforms" or, as in the case of Newsweek, gave up print altogether.
I was given the balance of my subscription in online editions, but I can't get the password to work and anyway I was not happy with the magazine's snarky tone after the management changed.
The New Yorker is a different matter. I have relied on it for quite a few decades as a cultural guide and curator, going back to the days when it cost well below a dollar per issue. When my renewal notice arrived and asked me either to choose between print or digital, or pay a whopping fee for both, I began weighing the options. Print editions tend to pile up, but they are supremely portable. A digital subscription would cut the clutter of half-read copies, but would not have the tactile appeal of print. I caved and got the dual option, mainly just to put off making a choice.
Now the Kindle is a digital godsend, especially when a book has 600- to 800-plus pages and tries the capacity of my arthritic fingers to hold it. I recently read "Far From the Tree" on the Kindle, but took it out of the library to see how the chapters were arranged on paper. A big chunky book, it would have been very unwieldy for me to read in bed, with its tendency to slip out of my grip and make me lose my place.
So even though I am further along the continuum of digital acceptance than many people my age, I still have nowhere near the nimbleness of early adopters in younger generations. It's true that papers nowadays don't make that solid "thunk" on the porch that means it's time to brew some coffee and see what's new in the world, but I miss the routine. A keyboard and a screen are just not the same as ink on paper. Come to think of it, if I hadn't had to cancel due to someone continually swiping my paper off said porch, I would probably still be a print subscriber.
Well, thanks anyway for reading the blog online. It beats hell out of having to hand out one story at a time on paper. If you are facing a choice between print and digital versions of your longtime favorite reading matter, maybe the blogs are the "gateway" to digital habits. What do you think?
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Weird me; I bought a Nook way back and still use it,but recently a "lighted" Kindle for night time. Both are good for when on the bike. The books there are not ones that I would buy in print. I like the feel of a book, and read at least two a week almost all fiction which requires no brains but helps imagination. Same with the news paper;print is the thing. Digital may do on the PC but is not the same.
ReplyDeleteThe world standa to lose everything when print goes out of existence. Electronic records can and will be destroyed without recovery. That is a given. Also as operating systems change older records become unreadable.
I'm down to 2 digital subscriptions, NYTimes an Scientific American and a subscription to Audible for books which I find far more convenient than hard-copy editions or using a Kindle type device..
ReplyDeleteIt is embarrasing but I still read my books on paper and magazines on printed paper, while the temptation is there I just can't imagine reading being the same on a tablet -although magazines, to which I am addicted to, might just push me to get a tablet, maybe even an IPad? Dr. Yood rightly points to the concern about technology tools becoming obsolete every few years, then what? I think I have had two or three laptops so far because of this very reason. I envy those who do not have this dilemma!
ReplyDelete