According to The Economist, we’re entering a new age of digital consumption: Lean Back 2.0. They say tablets and e-readers are to thank, but is it all just hyperbole about hypertext?
In a presentation given by Andrew Rashbass, CEO of The Economist Group, he claimed that the old publishing models of web and print are “irredeemably broken.” (I wasn’t aware that web publishing was old yet — though admittedly for some publishers it definitely is broken.)
So what the hell does he mean by “Lean Back 2.0″? Simple, really. He points to the fact that the use of tablets and e-readers is growing — at the expense of print and web use — and simultaneously also changing our reading habits. Unlike reading on a laptop, reading on an iPad or Kindle is a leisure activity. Unlike reading a print newspaper or magazine, you can access whatever the hell you like. We’re now combining the utility of modern tech with the enjoyment of reading as relaxation.
It kinda makes sense. But don’t just take Rashbass’s hyperbolic word for it, take some of his (not altogether convincing) figures too. In his presentation, he points out that 42 per cent of tablet users regularly read in-depth articles, and another 40 per cent read them occasionally — which suggests people read more longer items on tablets than on computers. Apparently.
Also, users’ eye activity is far more focused on an iPad app than on a website, and many people also claim they find it easier to learn new things and enjoy news more when digesting it via a tablet. Apparently.
But lets cut through some of the crap here. These figures aren’t really being compared directly to anything really useful. And terminology like “Lean Back 2.0″ is also horrible, nauseating PR bull shit.
That aside: he has a point. Reading from a tablet is more relaxing than reading at a laptop. Amongst those that I know, e-readers probably are having (some, small) measurable effect on the amount people read. These two facts are very positive.
Maybe you have similar experiences. Maybe you don’t. But if some people read some more stuff, that can only be a good thing. Just don’t call it Lean Back 2.0. [The Economist via The Verge; Image: preetamrai]
Timmahh
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 9:02 AMI have just one gripe about using ereaders! I no longer have an actual physical book to put in my bookshelves! Mind you they are already pretty full, but I do like the idea that these physical books will inevitably out last the technology that is trying to supplant them. Plus there’s the cool factor in being able to show them off! Damn you ereader!! Oh and for those who will inevitably say just buy the book instead or afterwards, I am trying, but mostly it’s very hard to find second hand versions of current books and even harder to find older ones.
cayal
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 9:23 AMI think you overvalue how cool it is to show off books…
Antipodean
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 11:38 AMI think you underestimate it!
Rahux
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 10:04 AMI was a very avid reader till uni and work got the best of me.. after buying a kindle a year and a half ago my reading has picked up again substantially. It’s the portability and the fact that I can access a book on any topic at any time (when I’m most motivated to read it) that makes it so helpful. Also for non-fiction I like the ability to highlight it and then be able to review my highlighted bits on my phone if I’m discussing the topic with someone.
W
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 10:17 AMI agree with Tammahh.
There’s something about having actual books on shelves that I like.
TSH
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 11:37 AMThis is me, except I got my Kindle 3 ~ 1 year ago and I read classic fiction.
There is a certain romantic sentiment to holding a book in my hand that’s older than I am, and reading the very ink and touching the exact same artifact that has been enjoyed by readers before me, and will be enjoyed after I’m done with it.
But for better or worse I don’t have space for physical books. Without even trying my Kindle stores a solid bookshelf full of material and lets me buy almost any book I want at any time. Many of them for free!
One day, if I ever have the space I will maintain a library of physical, second-hand books. Irradiated and hermetically sealed, they will be taken care of as historical artifacts and a safeguard against some kind of information apocalypse. Until that day, I’ll be carrying my library with me to lunch every day! :–P
TSH
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 11:38 AM… gah that was in reply to Rahux
JoeKeeng
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 3:22 PMA kindle was definitely responsible for getting me back in to reading regularly for the last year or so, but the agency pricing model which just jacked up a whole bunch of back catalogue (old) books to $12.50 minimum (from under $10) in the last few weeks will be responsible for driving me away again.
Rod
Sunday, December 18, 2011 at 10:34 PMI recently picked up an older reader second hand and filled it with pdfs of reference texts for my studies. having text wrapped so that there are only six words per line, I found I can read while walking – two activities that I never get around to. Apart from needing to take extra care at intersections, it’s a super healthy way to read.
WillD
Monday, December 19, 2011 at 2:09 PMSerious readers buy e-readers [like the Kindle] and not tablets, because the e-ink screens of the e-readers are designed to be much much easier on the eye for reading AND work very well in bright light and glare conditions unlike tablets which don’t.
Plus, if you buy an e-reader, it is only for reading, not playing games or watching videos – big difference in usage.
Marcus Gibson
Friday, January 20, 2012 at 2:20 PMContrary to what established publishers would have us believe, the rebirth of reading is just beginning. But not for the reasons described here.
The printed word was not dying because other forms of media became more appealing, or convenient. It was dying because all forms of publishing became too heavily aggregated, in the same way we saw in car manufacturing and banking. Like Adam Smith told us, a perfect market has an infinite number of players. Publishing become sluggish, risk-averse, and Inequitable – and such systems will always eventually fail.
What are witnessing is not a technological revolution, but a philosophical one enabled by technology, in the same way the printing press took publication out of the hands of scribes. It means a freer flow of more innovative ideas, and thereby better books and news.
Sure, the devices make finding and reading written content more convenient, but the real changes are these:
Ereaders take down barriers to entry, making the market more efficient and productive.
In economic terms, digital publishing allows for better allocation of capital to primary producers (writers) – more fairly rewarding those with the most valuable ideas.
Ereaders shorten the production cycle, making new content more topical and current.
Ereaders derisks publishing by unwinding the upfront capital investment, allowing for bolder publication choices.
But most important of all, instead of a handful of gatekeepers choosing what we read for us, we will now choose for ourselves – from 9 billion content creators, which as close to Adam Smith’s infinity as we can get.