Permalink | Leave a comment  »

From the New York Times Room for Debate Blog:

Initially, any new information medium seems to degrade reading because it disturbs the balance between focal and peripheral attention. This was true as early as the invention of writing, which Plato complained hollowed out focal memory. Similarly, William Wordsworth’s sister complained that he wasted his mind in the newspapers of the day. It takes time and adaptation before a balance can be restored, not just in the “mentality” of the reader, as historians of the book like to say, but in the social systems that complete the reading environment...

My group thinks that Web 2.0 offers a different kind of metaphor: not a containing structure but a social experience. Reading environments should not be books or libraries. They should be like the historical coffeehouses, taverns and pubs where one shifts flexibly between focused and collective reading — much like opening a newspaper and debating it in a more socially networked version of the current New York Times Room for Debate.

-Alan Liu

With all of the arguments about paper reading vs. digital reading I hadn't thought about this point: reading digitally opens up a whole new social structure for the readers involved and what may seem like distraction to some is really what Liu calls "peripheral attention."

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Just saw this in my twitter feed.

Thanks to you, we just passed @cocacola as the largest brand on @Facebook. Become a fan here: http://facebook.com/starbucks

This is impressive and no doubt their free pastry promotion played a part.  It's a simple idea that I see broken down into two parts:

a) people love anything free and they love free FOOD even more.

b) Starbucks' use of social media tools such as the sponsored event invitation in Facebook for their free pastry day are a terrific use of viral marketing.  You see your friends "attending" so you decide to do it too. 

At least, it worked for me.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »