Sunday, October 2, 2011

Print V. Digital

I tried as best I could to go into this debate as unbiased as I could as someone who enjoys technology. Both writers seem passionate about their respected topics as at first glance even the style of their respective pamphlets seems to radiate their objectives; with Hanna's being bound as a book and Dustin's being an exclusively digital file. Dustin's objective of supporting digital takes the form of three main reasons, convenience, cost, and environmental. All his points are convincing in their own ways and easy to follow for any audience, as all the points are very simple such as the cost being less or the fact it doesn't take trees to make copies. Hannah's arguments are almost a completely different direction as many are based on opinion rather then facts that can be backed up, for example the opinion that a generation as well as the current population will lose the experience of book, perhaps not all the public enjoys books in the same way. Also the fact that books can be passed rather then reprinted is a dull point as E-Books do not have to be printed in the first place. These simple points lead me to declare the winner to be Dustin on the side of supporting digital books.

1 comment:

  1. Dustin's argument rests mainly on the environmental-friendliness of digital publishing. Are we so certain digital readers are great for the environment though? Books are at the very least biodegradable, and composed of a renewable resource. With the constant tech upgrades which rule the present age, and likely will continue into the future what is going to happen to all the outmoded kindles, Ipads and android tablets? Although the Ipad may be marketed as recyclable in practice they will go straight to landfill I should think. And what of the rare earth metals needed to manufacture smart electronics? There is not an inexhaustible supply of these materials. It is possible print is greener than we've been told.

    ReplyDelete