Read how you want. Just as long as you read.

“Print is Dead” might well be the defining maxim of this day and information age: since the advent of electronic publishing, a vast number of articles, essays, and books have attempted the divine reading of hard copy’s viscera, and the final verdicts are about as telling as a fortune cookie. It’s true that printed books will never become obsolete, because as all book fetishists (as they’re deemed) will attest, there is no substitute for the sensual experience of a book. You can’t walk into a digital library and shed a tear at the beauty of the stacks, and you can’t get that antique bookstore smell in a bottle, at least not yet. However, the unquestionable importance and potential of digital media cannot be dismissed. Pioneering e-projects such as Project Gutenberg, Openlibrary.org, Internet Archive, and even Wikipedia have categorically proven that the future of educational information dissemination lies within the virtual realm. When one compares and contrasts, in principle, the viable effectiveness of Room to Read’s noble mission to build educational infrastructure in developing countries (initially by focusing on bringing physical books to negligible or non-existent libraries) with the potential efficacy of any online organization with similar goals, the result is clear: virtual is better. And considering that humanity’s existence, proliferation, and ability to improve quality of life is directly linked to our ability to educate ourselves, this is an important point. As Brewster Kahle notes in episode 144 of TwiT, “People are turning to their computer now to answer questions…If it’s not on the internet, it doesn’t exist.” But, fortunately for book fetishists and bibliophiles, the two mediums are not mutually exclusive. The Observer's literary editor Robert McCrum best sums up the symbiotic relationship of print and e-publishing in a fascinating article recapping the last ten years in the literary world: “…the Kindle and its e-book competitors will not kill the book but happily co-exist with it in a bright new bi-literary environment.”

On both sides of the battle, though, it’s two steps forward and one step backward. In a positive advancement for print publishing, a new company called Read How You Want has jumped on the customizability bandwagon, providing a wide variety of printing methods for special-needs readers. Whether a reader simply requires large print or something as particular as textual assistance in word tracking and character distinguishment, the company offers research-backed, individualized custom printing solutions, as well as e-books and MP3 audio books. By recognizing the long-tail viability of printing marginalized content, Read How You Want is joining the ranks of related print-on-demand publishers. Joanne Hamilton-Selway, quoted in a Publishers Weekly article about the company, hits the nail right on the head: “People are more vocal about what they want and about their right to have it…They consider it both a privilege and a right.” And it is – if one can get customized toenail clippers, one should surely be able to customize something a tad more…important. But as the saying goes, “every party has a pooper,” and that’s where Indiana’s state law regarding sexually explicit materials (e.g., books, magazines, etc.) comes into play. This new law mandates that any person who “intends to offer for sale or sell sexually explicit materials shall register with the secretary of state the intent to offer for sale or sell sexually explicit materials and provide a statement detailing the types of materials that the person intends to offer for sale or sell.” Oh, and said person must also pay $250. Why, when print publishing and physical bookstores are already having such a hard time keeping up with the Joneses, would a government act in such a futile and counter-productive manner against print?

On the flip side of the coin, one sees similar advances and backtrackings in e-media. As renowned economist Robert Solow grumbled, "You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics." In the 2007 National Endowment for the Arts report entitled “To Read or Not To Read: A Question of National Consequence,” it appears as though Solow’s proclamation rings true. Although internet access coupled with the quantity – and occasionally, quality – of content has exponentially increased over the past few years, people’s ability to synthesize this gluttonous wealth of information has simultaneously decreased; it is widely accepted that people’s attention spans have dramatically decreased, as well. Thus, this conundrum begs the question: if people are less and less able to meaningfully utilize the near-infinite amount of information at their fingertips, what benefit is there in having said information accessible? Before your head explodes, understand that I am no Luddite. I firmly believe that *all information should be accessible at all times, because ultimately even the most mundane “orphan book” might be useful to someone. And of course, the only viable way to achieve such a goal is via the Internet. However, before we as a world society get too bogged down in the debate between print versus electronic publication, we should focus upon how we can employ this “bi-literary environment” to regain what we are on the verge of losing, what we gained at the beginning of history when writing was first employed: the ability to meaningfully communicate.

*with considerations of appropriate context, maturity, etc., of course

Update: nowhere is the importance of reading more eloquently stated than here.