Written by Karen D. Swim
Two weeks ago, my Grandmother retired her old school TV Antenna for a digital converter box. If the FCC had not mandated that the US switch to digital on June 12th, my Gran would have kept using the rabbit ears.
In the world of early adopters one might say my Gran is a no bloomer. Yet, her diehard dedication to “rabbit ears” is not unlike those who hopelessly cling to the notion that social media is worthless and digital media is solely for the illiterati.
In a recent conversation with an erudite writer, I listened to what has become a familiar litany:
People who publish on the internet are not real writers. I am a noted journalist/writer/editor and accustomed to spending 6 weeks, writing 15 drafts before publishing.
My crowd is very literate and will not possibly be on Twitter. ( I pull up Twitter screen) Oh, look there’s Bill /Jane/ Buffy, they’re on Twiter?
I do not have time to waste engaging in urbane conversations with plebian strangers.
Internet publishing is for hacks.
Overlooking the fact that I had just been called a moronic hack who spends time on inane platforms talking to a motely bunch of idiots, I patiently explained this new world that has “killed newspapers” and made superstars out of the unknown. I politely declined to point out that a truly impressive insult would have described “my people” as having brains as dry as the remainder biscuit after a voyage.
Alas, we no longer use insults such as: “Away!, Thou art poison to my blood.” Yet, in spite of the evolution of the English language we have managed to make amazing discoveries, and advances. Who’da thunk it? (See what fun online writing can be?)
Those who view online writing as a dumbing down of provocative thoughts and ideas are missing the point entirely. It is an expansion of creative thought, discussion and collective collaboration. While other forms of publishing aim to “talk at” digital publishers “talk to.” It’s the sharing and exchange of ideas and information in real time.
Literature, and great writing are not dying, we are simply evolving in the way we communicate. Many will hold on until the bitter end, until change has steamrolled over them leaving no other choice but the truly erudite will not only embrace the change but lead the way.
What do you think? Are we diminishig the art of writing with online publishing?
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=63459b2b-79f0-4f2d-8846-7ead760f23e6)
Karen,
This certainly would not be the first time that I have heard comments like that.
Whilst it is true that there are some bloggers who simply rant and give the blogosphere a bad name, there are also many who produce thoughtful and well informed written material, and when I hear comments like this, I often reflect on the fact that these people are obviously not reading many of the thought provoking and informative blogs which I personally read (including this one of course).
Not to dispute the value of professional editors, but the idea that they and they alone are the only ones capable of articulating an informed viewpoint does not reflect the reality of the modern media landscape.
Andrew´s last blog post..Will good intentions wither in tough times?
@Maggie, you are so right! I We seem to want or maybe need to believe that all good things require toil, sweat and paying your dues. I can understand wanting to feel like you have an advantage because you went to J-school but truthfully, there are many who never even attended college who could write circles around professionals!
I’m an illustrator as my day job. I draw pictures. Do I have a problem with the millions of people on Deviantart, Flickr or who have themselves published via online zine or small press?
Not At ALL.
I can’t stand “gatekeepers” who feel they have some privilege of doing what they do; whether art, writing or basket weaving.
I see it that I nave absolutely NO right to tell anyone what they can or can’t do. I can however encourage people to do what they love…whatever that is. Please…show off your stuff! Get critiques, Improve! Keep doing it every day.
Does this in any way cheapen the work of a creative? Not one bit. Actually it’s the bunghole gatekeepers who ruin it for many.
Honestly, what is the difference between published writer/ artist/ basket weaver and the home published zine person? Honestly, I give less than a damn whether you’re published or not. That doesn’t mean you’re any good. It means absolutely nothing. There’s tons of really GOOD folks out there who aren’t published or are diamonds in the rough who should be ENCOURAGED and included instead of derided as “pft, unpublished” and excluded.
1. Who gives anyone the right to deride or dismiss anyone?
2. What is the difference between published and unpublished creatives?
Seriously…I think there is a sliding scale of skill and everyone is on the road (or should be) of improvement, regardless of whether or how something is put out for the world to see.
Honestly my own scale is dependent on skill, effort, natural talent and people who are willing to learn, listen as well as be frank about what they do. Let the work speak for itself and leave the ego at the door.
“Being Published” is largely a matter of “right place and right time” multiplied by “who you know”, plus an ounce of ability, a little bit of luck, and often a lot of hustling. Note that “skill” is the smallest factor here.
#thoughtfail!
If not for the net I wouldn’t have my writing group that encourages me and pushes me, my number-one beta (who I have never met IRL) and I wouldn’t get to daily talk with writers, agents, and editors who have dedicated themselves to helping me (and others) be the best possible writer. I wouldn’t have immediate access to mind-boggling research, I wouldn’t have — well, so many things.
If your friend wants to stay out on the fringes and ignore what’s in front of them, they’re shorting themselves. I’d say more for the rest of us–but really, as it is, there’s more than enough for everybody.
thelittlefluffycat´s last blog post..In Which I Do Not Apologize For Laziness
The medium does not determine the quality of the message, just the delivery. Good writing stands out whether it’s published to traditional channels, Internet channels or skywriting.
Gary Ballard´s last blog post..The Know Circuit – Chapters
Karen,
I love this conversation! All these wise, articulate responses to your thought-provoking post clearly demonstrate the inaccuracy of your erudite friend’s assessment. Isn’t poetic justice wonderful?
Jeanne
Great post! Here’s the thing: much to journalists’ chagrin, there are actually many, many people in this world who can write beautifully but aren’t fortunate enough to be able to write for a living. Does that mean they can’t write? There are also plenty of “professional” writers who can’t write worth a damn, no matter how long they slave over a piece. The internet makes it possible for people who love to write to write and be read, instead of just filling up journals that nobody will ever see.
If anything, online publishing gives talented writers who didn’t go to J-school or whatever a chance to be discovered…which is why “real” writers are so threatened.
Maggie´s last blog post..Why "Sponsored Posts" and "Authenticity" Don’t Mix
Hi Everyone! I got caught yesterday with client work but really, really enjoyed your discussions here! So, rescued comments from spam (sorry about the delay), have coffee and will work in shifts to answer you all. Such an insightful, wise group of writers proving “the snoterati” was so, so wrong! 🙂
@Roland, *sigh* so true. The elite power structure often rages against what they most fear. When we make things more accessible it creates competition and forces the “old guard” to innovate to hold on to their market share.
@Robert, lol! Shakespeare really did write the best insults! Hey, you should write that down. I agree with you, the relationships, knowledge and just plain fun of twitter are valuable to me. Phooey on the elitists who think otherwise.
@Meryl, thank you so much for that! I am so tempted to print this all out and mail it, lol, but that would not be nice so I’ll just enjoy the moment here with all of you. 🙂
@Brad, you are spot on. The sad part is that while “the snoterati” belittles the contributions of the online writer, the same is not true of how we feel about them. I love an in depth, well researched, well written story. I mourn the loss of newspapers and adore print media but the respect seems to flow one way. I understand the resentment – you earn a degree and work your butt off to become a respected writer and then “anyone can become a writer with a website and an idea.” However, the same can be said of the 14 year old entrepreneur who out earns MBAs ten times over.
@Sharon, it does get tiring and honestly it’s pointless for the snobs to continue in their complaints. It’s here, it’s not going away, get over it. 🙂
@Chris, oooh great point about bloggers and twitter! We must be pre-wired to rail against change! 🙂
@Rebecca, I stood up and applauded when I read your right on comment! Well said Rebecca! This one should be bookmarked by believers and non-believers alike!
@Fred, “gatekeepers never like things that break down their gates.” Very telling statement and so true!
@Jamie, whoo hoo! I know such an eloquent response! The comments here are so insightful and such an antithesis to the opinions stated by “snoterati” that I may turn this into something more… Another benefit of making writing accessible to the masses is that people are excited about writing and reading. For those of us who have a lifelong love of words, this tickles us pink. Young people sit down and express themselves in words (not text speak) on their blogs, Facebook and MySpace pages. I am blown away when I read the personal essays of younger family members or kids of friends and delighted that they have fallen in love with writing.
@Jeff, your comment so beautifully illustrates many deeper lessons. Aww, so true that tough times make us nostalgic for the past. As you pointed out though there is danger in looking back rather than moving forward (look out it worked out for Lot’s wife!). I love your statement, “freedom is hard duty.” Yes, yes.
@A.B. I love the smell of old books too! I call the library my “happy place.” I love holding a book in my hand. I love browsing bookstores, especially the old indie bookstores. However, my recent brush with publishing (working with an author) has demonstrated that they are deeply in crisis. It is an industry that can no longer afford to nurture and support upcoming talent. I no longer question why many writers opt for small press or self publishing, unless you’re JK Rowling you’ll fork over profits and get very little help to sell your books.
@Janice, lol! Pens and brushes up for that! I agree no need for fighting as there is a place for us all. I can view photos online and have amazing enjoyment but still love a day at a gallery or museum. You are so right there is no shortage of awful in any medium. Methinks you have captured my sentiments exactly!
@Jeanne – “After all, there’s nothing quite like a flock of noisy, honking geese to highlight the beauty and elegance of a graceful swan.” Your thoughts were dead on and this quote is a keeper for me!
@Kelly, the sad part is that the erudite could lead the way and inspire us all to raise our game. When I read great writing, I learn and am challenged to grow. (Well sometimes I eat chocolate and wonder how I could possibly call myself a writer but then after a bit of self pity I really do grow!) Being a “didn’t adopter” is fine. While we would immensely enjoy you on Twitter, it makes it even more fun to visit and chat with you on your blog. And MCE is present on Twitter because we share. 🙂 Just between you and me I don’t own an Ipod. In fact, I have not one but two walkmans, a “newer” one that plays CDs and the first one I ever got when I was 16. lol I plan on donating it to the Smithsonian. 🙂
Karen,
Of course I agree with all the others that your literate friend was being a snob and an ignorant one. Because there is so much *more* writing available to read online, there is a lot more drivel. No doubt. That doesn’t mean we’ve dumbed down, it means we’ve opened the floodgates, removed the barriers to entry.
Ya gotta sort more than with print.
In print, whole lot of someones get paid to sort for you.
Myself, I wish I had time to be in on more social media—for the worthless moments (which have so much worth) and the worthwhile moments.
I sometimes keenly feel that I’m missing out on Twitter and some other avenues I’d love to explore, personally and for business. I know I appear to be a late adopter, when in fact I’ve looked at the 24 hours I have in all my forseeable future days (someone, please send me more hours!) and decided there is no more room. I’ll be a didn’t-adopter. But not because I can’t move into the future, and definitely not because I can’t imagine engaging with the unwashed masses.
Because I have a lot of engaging to do outside this screen, so with a sigh, I know I couldn’t do it all justice.
March on, stay literate. You’re absolutely proof that your erudite buddy isn’t so very erudite. 🙂
Regards,
Kelly
Kelly´s last blog post..Inspiration Points: Don’t Sell Me. Help Me Gather Memories!
Hi, Karen.
Thanks for your thoughtful presentation of a topic that’s relevant to all online writers. Here are a few of my own thoughts on the issue:
The world is changing so fast today that there’s simply no way print media can compete with the Internet. The immediacy and interactive nature of the Information Superhighway add so much to the potential relevance of its offerings that print publications of necessity operate in a comparative “Dark Age.” Of course, that isn’t to imply that certain types of writing don’t do well in a print format. After all, the classics have been known and loved down through the ages and will never lose their appeal, no matter how lightning-fast the written word may be transmitted through cyberspace.
Personally, I wouldn’t say that either medium is superior to the other—except perhaps in certain circumstances or for certain specific purposes. Rather, I believe that each is…well…simply different. For either the print writer or the Internet writer to disparage or look down on the other as being somehow less professional or less gifted seems to me the height of arrogance and immaturity—not to mention inaccuracy. There’s definitely room for both in the modern literary world and there are talented and untalented writers in both mediums.
That said, it’s certainly true that, due to the highly democratic nature of the Web, there are likely far more mediocre to downright terrible writers jamming the Net waves than there are besmirching the pages of print publications; but, that doesn’t take one iota of value away from the truly talented online writer—and in fact simply serves to allow the cream of the crop to more easily and more obviously rise to the top. After all, there’s nothing quite like a flock of noisy, honking geese to highlight the beauty and elegance of a graceful swan.
When a print writer insults and treats a fellow author who happens to use the Internet as her forum of choice as an inferior simply because she has chosen an online medium, it’s a clear sign of unfair stereotyping. And as with all stereotyping, it demonstrates a lack of knowledge, understanding, and insight into the judged individual’s specific abilities and accomplishments. It also demonstrates a defensiveness that likely stems from insecurity. But, this is the very nature of prejudice, is it not?
Even to someone as exacting and perfectionistic as I tend to be when editing my work, I have to say that 15 drafts sounds just a tad excessive and, in fact, hints at a serious case of paralysis by analysis at the very least and a deathly fear of failure (or success) at the worst. (I’ve experienced all the above fears myself, at one time or another—though, thankfully, I haven’t used those personal eccentricities as an excuse for denigrating other people’s work or talents.)
The journalist/writer/editor of whom you speak is no doubt very good at what he does (the 15 drafts notwithstanding). Now, if only he would broaden his outlook slightly and begin to recognize the talent of his fellow wordsmiths—both on and off the Internet—he’d become far more credible as a judge of literary talent and we could actually take his viewpoint seriously.
Thanks again for your thoughtful treatment of a highly relevant topic.
Jeanne
P.S. Your journalist/writer/editor must be reading the wrong websites. Some of the most intelligent, articulate, and elegant writing I’ve ever read has flashed across my computer monitor from the “nether” regions of cyberspace.
Piffle. If it is relevant they will come…. Hey, that Guttenburg guy is really dumbing things down, we illuminated manuscribes are the real writers….yeah….
I think there is a solid place for curated arts, written, visual, and kinetic. Just as I think there is a solid place for clever quick creative tinkerers of tech. Now marry the two….
And yes, just because you can doesn’t mean you should… there’s some pretty awful stuff out there, but then there’s some very dry not so fascinating literature too…
Methinks said litterati lacks imagination.
( Hah piffle and methinks in one comment…that’s fun.)
Janice Cartier´s last blog post..Snail Mail And Twitter
I have to agree wholeheartedly with Jamie Grove’s comment. I’ve been posting online either in forums or on blogs and submitting my work to magazines and publishing houses for nearly a decade now.
How much has submitting taught me? Not much other than how to take rejection and how to handle the publishing process the time or two I did make it through.
How much has reading and posting online taught me? I’ve learned tons online. Between reading blogs, participating in forums, and what publications I’ve done online, I’ve gotten valuable feedback on everything from my writing style and technique to child rearing. Online writer’s forums and groups have done several times more to improve my skills than formal classes and submitting to slush piles.
As much as I love libraries and bookstores, the smell of an old book, and seeing words printed on the page, I have to admit to worries the traditional publishing industry is going stagnant.
A. B. England´s last blog post..An Interesting Idea Indeed
Those who decry, disparage and denounce social media and digital publishing are protectionists living in a world of nostalgia, yearning for yesteryear. The tougher times get, the more nostalgia seems the clever play.
The smart money, of course, is moving on. New technologies, new markets, new opportunities, new hope, new conversations, new writings, new communities — time and commerce never go backward. Nostalgia is just a way to convince the frightened that someone else is to blame. Erudite writers refuse to embrace that the world is changing and that people don’t want “talked at” or even “talked to,” they want “talked with.” People want an open, honest, transparent, two-way conversation.
We are tempted to pine for former days, to imagine that life was better in some “golden age,” and to believe that some evil power forced modernity on us. That all we need for restoring sanity to our lives is to go back to a bygone era’s certainties, when top down control was embraced and those who marched to a different drum were pronounced heretics. That only an exclusive few have the ability to communicate and write with any panache and the rest of us are to consume those thoughts and litanies without causing any provocation.
We play with fire when we cast longing looks backward and refuse to embrace change. We risk losing today and compromising tomorrow. We lapse into delusion, as if rekindling a high school romance wipes all slates clean. Today’s problems don’t get solved by imagining better times, especially when those times weren’t any better. How can we make a useful contribution to today’s society if we are fighting over yesterday, freezing time in an ancient place and treating writing and publishing as a profession that stopped with the invention of the Internet? We must not emulate these pedantic writers. Freedom is hard duty. To paraphrase a great quote, “Off with their pens!”
Milan Kundera said, “If everyone writes, who will read?”
The Internet is something like an answer to that question, and the answer is: everyone.
Online writing represents a major democratization of the process of writing. I can write whatever I like and post it online. You may write whatever you like and post it online. It does not need to go through any editorial filters.
The only test is your own aim.
If you aim to have people read your work, you will write in a certain way. If you aim to please yourself, you can write any way you like.
Is this a good thing or does it besmirch the fine and stately tradition of writing?
Well, first, I’d argue that there is no fine and stately tradition. Our very best writers are a scurrilous bunch prone to excess and psychosis. I’m not judging these folks, just stating the truth. However, there is a fine and stately tradition of editing. I do not wish to upset editors, but I’m with Mark Twain on this subject (which should come as no surprise):
“I am not the editor of a newspaper and shall always try to do right and be good so that God will not make me one.”
Editors play a vital role in the process of creation, so does revision. Yet, we cannot assume that merely because a body of writing appears upon a slice of dead wood that it is somehow superior to the words transmitted by electrons. No, this would not be fair to the art of writing.
If anything, we are improving the art of writing by enabling writers to learn the direct actions of their pens. To toss them out before cruel audiences for public ridicule. To reveal failure and error. To show humanity…
So, no, I do not think that the art of writing suffers by what is created and distributed online. In fact, I would ask the opposite question…
Is the tyranny print distribution destroying the art of writing?
Where would writers like James Joyce and Flannery O’Connor find their audience today? Where would Charles Dickens publish his works? For that matter, what newspaper in America would take on such an opinionated and untamed writer such as Mark Twain?
And yet, it is the lack of these unique voices in our print sources that is utterly killing an entire industry. The local newspaper is under siege? Really? The last time I checked, nearly every newspaper in this country is running the same wire articles, the same drab, polarizing opinion pages. They’re fresh out of ideas because they’re fresh out of words because they cut the talent.
The same goes for magazines and even for most of mainline book publishing world. They’ve opted for volume because it makes sense to consolidate costs. They’ve opted for mediocrity and so in doing so have squashed themselves in the process.
They say that this is the only way to make it, and yet they are failing across the board, and in failing they are destroying the depth and variety in the art of writing.
Thankfully though, the art is alive and well online.
Jamie Grove´s last blog post..Writing Is…
Gatekeepers never like things that break down gates.
Your post brought that to mind and I wanted to add it to the conversation you’ve started. ‘Talk at’ vs ‘Talk to’ is very telling – I find the blogs I like best seem to be reinventing the art of front porch conversation. Learning the limits to your own viewpoints as well as how others view the world is something you can’t get from a one way conversation. So rather than ‘dumbing down’ I think we’re on a path towards improving the quality of thought and writing overall – and it takes talented writers like yourself to bring readers along and encourage meaningful feedback. (Sure there are hick-ups along the way – spam and teenage ranting – but it’s a learning process!)
(Also, I admire your patience – It can be awfully hard to smile through an unintentional insult. )
Fred H Schlegel´s last blog post..3 Kinds Of Companies Trying To Survive and Thrive.
With all due respect to the late Marshall McLuhan, the media is not the message but simply a tool for delivery. One century it’s the quill pen on parchment, the next it’s radio waves.
If Granny is happy with the content that is delivered to her by the TV with rabbit ears antenna – or was until forced to “upgrade” – surely that’s all that matters there? And if some people don’t “get” social media, is that a problem for those who do embrace Twitter? Live and let live. Chacun à son goût.
The real problem here is the staggeringly poor manners of those who insult and invalidate a writer’s work because of the medium in/on which it appears.
Are the works of Shakespeare more or less “valid” whether they’re performed on stage or read silently from a printed page? Obviously not.
But it was ever thus.
When television came along, film scriptwriters sneered at their brethren who wrote for the “small screen,” for example. When mass-market paperback books came along, traditional “literary” publishers drew in their metaphorical skirts and disassociated themselves with that branch of the industry they saw as catering to the great unwashed.
“Are we diminishing the art of writing with online publishing?”
Just about as much as Gutenberg diminished the Bible (as gospel and/or as literature), when he cranked up his printing press and put a lot of page-illuminating monks out of work.
As you say:
“Those who view online writing as a dumbing down of provocative thoughts and ideas are missing the point entirely. It is an expansion of creative thought, discussion and collective collaboration.”
Absolutely.
Rebecca Leaman´s last blog post..SociafyQ – Free Social Media Tracking and Analytics
It’s the same thing that people have been doing for millennia: “my p%^&s is 15 drafts long and 6 weeks around!”. Sad, but perhaps unavoidable: I’ve seen a few bloggers complaining about Twitter in much the same way…
I am so sick of the snobbery. I have worked both in print and online – does one make me a better writer than the other? If you have writing and research skills, you will bring those to whatever medium you work in. Your post is a great example of that, Karen.
Sharon Hurley Hall´s last blog post..Location Independent Group Writing Project
Karen, I’ve been dealing with traditional print media for years, and the snob factor is off the charts high – inexplicably so these days, considering how poorly their media are faring financially and influentially. Professional journalists may be better writers technically, and their stories may be better researched. We should all respect and place value in that. But I think one reason blogging has caught on is credibility. Journalists, as we all do, have bias. It shades their writing, sometimes unfairly so. The appeal of our type of writing is the town square effect (something I read in a David Meerman Scott book). You hear many voices, and through the conversation, what is true, what is right, what is fair, all rises to the top. Writing quality is a secondary issue. The town square communication model has more appeal than the centralized, command-and-control model of big media conglomerates. This is nothing new – what’s new is big media. When my parents grew up in Chicago, there were more than 40 daily newspapers published in the city. All we’re doing is going back to a more familiar way of communicating, but on a larger, digital scale. As people continue to gravitate to social media, the quality of writing will continue to improve.
Brad Shorr´s last blog post..How a Non-Profit Organization (NPO) Can Raise More Money
Look at your own post, Karen! It’s a work of writing art and published online. So, the answer is most certainly not thanks to talented writers like you!
Meryl K. Evans´s last blog post..Q&A on Query Letters and Book Authoring with Wendy Burt
“Away! Thou are poison to my blood!”
Now THERE’S an insult I can get behind! 😀
Yep; gotta admit I’m a late follower, too. But when I finally arrive – look out! Twitter has enhanced my online relationships in ways that I still have trouble defining! Maybe I should write that down?
I completely fail to see how writing on papers, walls, clay tables, using the printing machine, the typewriter, the goose feather, or a computer effects the actual thoughts and ideas.
It is like saying: real painters don’t paint with oil on canvas, real painters use grease, and coal and urine, and they paint on walls.
Plus, he actually diminishes his own abilities stating that only the paper and the pen makes him a writer.
Roland Hesz´s last blog post..Bedridden