| Main |

Chris Anderson on the social filtering of news and media

Chris Anderson, currently most well-known for his provocative book Free, today put forward his views in yet another interview, this time with a cranky reporter from Spiegel, published under the catchy title of ‘Maybe Media Will Be a Hobby Rather than a Job’.

I’m most interested in what he says about how he gets his news, which is precisely the How Influence Drives Content and Publishing theme of the upcoming Future of Influence Summit. It is good to hear this said in someone else’s words, from an information consumers’ perspective. Here is an excerpt from the interview…

SPIEGEL: So how do you stay informed?

Anderson: It comes to me in many ways: via Twitter, it shows up in my inbox, it shows up in my RSS base, through conversations. I don’t go out looking for it.

SPIEGEL: You just don’t care.

Anderson: No, I do care. You know, I pick my sources, and I trust my sources.

SPIEGEL:As millions upon millions trusted the classic media previously.

Anderson: If something has happened in the world that’s important, I’ll hear about it. I heard about the protests in Iran before it was in the papers because the people who I subscribe to on Twitter care about those things.

SPIEGEL: The New York Times, CNN, Reuters and others can publish their best reporting on the Web and you’d never read it?

Anderson: I read lots of articles from mainstream media but I don’t go to mainstream media directly to read it. It comes to me, which is really quite common these days. More and more people are choosing social filters for their news rather than professional filters. We’re tuning out television news, we’re tuning out newspapers. And we still hear about the important stuff, it’s just that it’s not like this drumbeat of bad news. It’s news that matters. I figure by the time something gets to me it’s been vetted by those I trust. So the stupid stuff that doesn’t matter is not going to get to me.

“Social filtering” is a great way to describe this process. Instead of going directly to the source, we are only going to content that our network suggests is going to be interesting or relevant to us.

The “influence” part of this describes the detailed mechanisms whereby news or media becomes visible to us. This includes both the individual influencers and what they do to surface content, and equalty importantly, the structure of the influence networks that results in relevant content being visible.

A lot more on this topic before, during, and after Future of Influence Summit.

For the most current insights and trends in the living networks, follow @rossdawson on Twitter!

  • http://zippy1300.blogspot.com Danny Bloom

    ROSS DAWSON
    Chris Anderson shot himself in the HEAD with that silly interview, which has become the laughingstock of the blogosphere in USA now. What said many stupid things. Dummy! But he is a smart man, so what happened? Was he smoking something?
    see my take on him here and my ideas on SCREENING
    http://zippy1300.blogspot.com
    and do you think SCREENING is good new word for reading on screens versus READING on paper? Agree or disagree? Reax.

  • http://zippy1300.blogspot.com Danny Bloom

    PRESS RELEASE
    FROM: Center for the Future of the Screen
    DIRECTOR: Danny Bloom
    WEBSITE: http://zippy1300.blogspot.com
    OFFICE: TAIPEI, TAIWAN
    Do we need a new word for the new-fangled kind of “reading” we do on screens?
    TAIPEI, TAIWAN — Are you reading this press release — or — are you
    screening this? How you answer
    this question will determine whether you get to the bottom of this
    news release.
    Alex Beam, writing in the Boston Globe on June 19, fired the first
    volley in this now-national
    discussion. “Do we read differently on the computer screen from how we
    read on the
    printed page?” Beam asked rhetorically. His column was headlined by a
    savvy Globe copyeditor: “I screen, you screen, we all screen.”
    The answer to Beam’s question is, of course, yes. From most of the
    research that has come in so
    far from academics in
    North America and Europe, the answer is clear, although not everyone’s
    in agreement with what it all means.
    Yes, screening has multiple meanings. We screen movies, we screen job
    candidates, we screen
    patients for medical problems, we do a lot of “screening” in this
    world of ours. And now, you will be hearing a lot about a new kind of
    “screening” — so-called reading on plastic, pixelated screens.
    Dr. Anne Mangen at the
    University of Stavanger in Norway tells us what she thinks about the word
    “screening” for reading on a screen: “My first
    impression is that the term ‘screening’ is adequate in some
    respects, but not in others. It’s adequate to the extent that it
    points to certain differences in the reading mode which has to do with
    the display nature, the central bias of a screen compared to a page of
    print text (our gaze is naturally oriented towards the center), and
    the image-like character of modalities (we tend to read a screen
    spatially, in contrast to the page which we linearly).”
    Dr Mangen, in a published academic paper published in Britain last
    December, listed a few reasons that reading on paper
    and reading on a screen are two very different animals.
    * Reading on a screen is not as rewarding — or effective — as
    reading printed words on paper.
    * The process of reading on a screen involves so much physical
    manipulation of the
    computer that it interferes with our ability to focus on and
    appreciate what we’re reading.
    * Online text moves up and down the
    screen and lacks physical dimension, robbing us of a feeling of
    completeness.
    * The visual happenings on a compter screen and our physical interaction
    with the entire device and its set ip can be distracting. All of these things
    tax human cognition and concentration in a way that a book or
    newspaper or magazine does not.
    * The experience of reading a book or a newspaper or a magazine is
    both a story experience and a tactile one.
    The jury’s still out on just how different reading on paper is
    from reading on a screen, but the public discussions in the blogsphere
    are getting interesting — and heated. But more and more, top experts
    in the computer and Internet fields, as well as typeface designers and
    readability gurus, are in agreement that we need a new word
    for reading on screens, and that the word should be “screening.” For
    now. A completely new word might come down the information highway in
    the future and take the place of screening. But for now, you screen, I
    screen, we all screen.
    We asked Kevin Kelly, the well-respected maverick of Wired magazine,
    what he felt about this
    new word for reading on screens, he told us by email in one short sentence: “I
    would be happy to see screening become a verb (for this).”
    Mim Harrison, a book editor in Florida with Levenger Press, said: “I find the
    distinction between reading and screening to be intriguing, and it
    certainly gives us all pause to consider just what it is we’re doing
    with our eyeballs these days.”
    “Screening, of course, is not a new term,” a top expert in predicting
    the future told us in a recent email, but this might just be the
    time that it catches on in the way you suggest. Screening is a clever
    and useful term capturing the fact that the
    experience of reading on a screen is fundamentally different from reading
    on paper. Not a priori worse or better; just different.”
    And then he added this important note: “It is the right word for the
    moment in terms of drawing people’s attention to the vast literary
    shift about to wash over us.”
    When we asked technology reporter John Markoff at the New York Times
    about this idea, he replied in a one-word email note: “Hmmmmmmm.”
    We asked David Pogue at the New York Times the same question, and he
    said: “Very interesting.”

  • http://rossdawsonblog.com Ross Dawson

    Dan,
    Reading is reading whatever the medium the words appear on. Since media for reading are converging, any word that tries to specify what we are reading on will have a short shelf-life.

  • http://zippy1300.blogspot.com/ danny bloom

    Ross
    i agree, well said. Can you answer these questions then? and maybe blog on it. many people are now answering the questions, see my blog, ALL points of view.
    1. Since reading on paper is very different from reading on screens,
    do you think that at some point it might be useful , maybe, to coin a new word in English
    for “reading on screens”, ……yes or no?
    2. If yes , …..can you suggest any possible words for this new word: maybe
    scanning? screen-reading? screening? any other words you can think of
    that might work well here, words or terms?
    3. A futurist inthe USA , a very well known person, tells me:
    “Screening” is not a new term, but this might just be the time that it
    catches on, given the imminent arrival of Apple’s iPad, and other
    devices. The last time I heard it — screening — in this way — was
    back in the late 1990s when the RocketBook and Softbook made their
    debut, but the term didn’t do any better than the products did.”
    do you agree with him that THIS might be the time SCREENING catches
    on? Yes or no or comments?
    4. This furturist told me “This time around, screening is a clever and
    useful term capturing the fact
    that the experience reading on a screen is fundamentally different
    from reading on paper. Not a priori worse or better; just different.”
    Do you agree with him here, yes or no or comments?
    5. This futurist also told me …”So definitley SCREENING is the right
    word for the moment in terms of drawing
    people’s attention to the vast literary shift about to wash over
    us….Do you agree that we are now witnessing a vast literary shift
    about to wash over us? YES NO MAYBE? COMMENTS?
    6. Is there any research yet that speaks about the way that different
    parts of the brain light up when people read on paper compared to when
    they read on a screen? Has anyone studied it this way yet? Can it be
    studied this way? Do you think it is possible that different parts of
    the brain light up when we read on paper vs reading on screens? Might
    PHD people do research on this in the future.? how could one conduct
    such research? with MRI machines? brain scans?
    7. Does reading on screens hamper or hinder our critical analysis
    skills of what we are reading?
    8. If in the future most reading is done on screens, from computers to
    iPhones to Kindles to even textbooks on screens, could this hurt the
    critical thinking skills of young people to think, analyze and asess
    information?
    9. Do you think people will be reading on paper surfaces anymore in
    the year 2050? in the year 2099?
    10. Are you willing or ready to say goodbye to MR PAPER, and greet
    the SCREEN AGE with a complete open-minded welcome?

AHT GROUP VENTURES & FEATURED CONTENT

http://ahtgroup.com/
http://www.futureexploration.net/
http://rossdawson.com/
http://crowdsourcingresults.com/
http://rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2011/01/zeitgeist-2011-anxiety-mobility-blending-indulgence-immersion-wrath-nudity-and-more.html
http://smetechnologyforum.com/
http://ideavisualization.net/
http://rossdawsonblog.com/
http://rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2010/12/map_of_the_deca.html

About the Blog author

Ross Dawson Photo

Ross Dawson is globally recognized as a leading futurist, entrepreneur, keynote speaker, strategy advisor, and bestselling author. He is Founding Chairman of AHT Group, which consists of 3 companies: consulting, publishing, and ventures firm Advanced Human Technologies, future and strategy firm Future Exploration Network, and events company The Insight Exchange.

Ross is author most recently of Getting Results From Crowds, the prescient Living Networks, which anticipated the social network revolution, the Amazon.com bestseller Developing Knowledge-Based Client Relationships, and Implementing Enterprise 2.0. (click on the links for free chapter downloads). He is based in Sydney and San Francisco with his wife jewellery designer Victoria Buckley and two beautiful young daughters.

Twitter

Contact me

Go to main blog page

UPCOMING EVENT

Crowdsourcing Week 2013

FEATURED WEBSITE

RossDason.com

Subscribe

 RSS

Archives