Diana Brown's Assignment #3 - Paper vs. Pixels: Printed Books and eReaders in Education

When publishing changes, so does society. Investigate and compare the impact of two publication technologies, one pre-1900 and one post-1962, on a specific aspect of society (e.g. education, politics, creative industries, science, entertainment, social relationships). 

The publishing technologies that I chose to compare were printed books versus electronic books (available on various eReaders). Newton’s Third Law of Motion is relevant to this topic because “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”. It seems as though for every upside to traditional publishing and printed books, there is a downside to ePublishing and eBooks. It also works the other way around - for every eBook pro there is strike against printed books.

Although society often focuses on the shortcomings of each medium, we need to stop treating these two resources as opposing forces, as each serves unique purposes. These publishing platforms can work together and make up for each others deficiencies to provide timely, relevant and authentic information for use in educational settings.

In my Flickr photo collection, I have juxtaposed printed books and eBooks to show how one’s weakness is the other’s strength. My goal in this collection is to show how each medium balances the other (… the yin and yang of publishing!). Here is how each format reigns supreme in various categories of importance to readers in educational settings:

	Book	eBook
Authenticity	✯
Longevity	✯
Readability	✯
Simplicity	✯
Reliance	✯
Searchability		✯
Portability		✯
User Experience		✯
Accessibility		✯
Currency		✯

Please click here to see my set of 20 images on Flickr that capture the reasons why these two publishing platforms work so well together in the realm of education.


AUTHENTICITY


Book (Pro) - The physical book wins out over eBooks when it comes to authenticity. Printed books are generally seen as more credible because of the traditional publishing process (one-to-many model). This process ensures that the written work is vetted by many individuals (including literary agents, editors and retailers, among others). This helps “weed out’” inaccurate and low-quality work for use in educational settings.


eBook (Con) - eBooks can’t compare to physical books when it comes to authenticity. eBooks are simple to create and the process is becoming more streamlined all the time. Because of the ease of creation, anyone with a computer and an Internet connection can publish an eBook (many-to-many publishing model). When everyone is a publisher, who is responsible for filtering out the noise? Teachers? Students? This is still a grey area.


LONGEVITY


Book (Pro) - The physical book wins out over eBooks when it comes to longevity. Printed works can last hundreds of years if properly preserved and even many decades if improperly preserved. Printed books can be used in the classroom and they will continue to exist in their physical form, with the exception that they are physically destroyed. You can spill a drink on them, remove parts and roll them up without doing damage to the overall product. When was the last time you said the same thing about an eReader?


eBook (Con) - eBooks can’t compare to physical books when it comes to longevity. Sure, there is little fear that “ripping out pages” will damage a file, however one or two wrong clicks will result in a losing the entire work. The high cost of digital textbooks, paired with this sense of impermanence leaves consumers feeling uneasy about buying expensive ePublications. Additionally, purchasing eBooks are commonly thought of as “renting” not “buying” because files reside on server. This lack of control has some readers running for the hills!


READABILITY


Book (Pro) - The physical book wins out over eBooks when it comes to readability. Ink on paper provides high contrast and makes it easy to read the printed page. Off-white and cream-coloured stocks are typically preferred by long document publishers because they are easy on the eyes.


eBook (Con) - eBooks can’t compare to physical books when it comes to readability. Screen fatigue makes reading pixels on a screen tiring on the eyes. Many eReaders use e-ink technology to mimic ink on paper, but the simulation is never as good as the real thing.


SIMPLICITY


Book (Pro) - The physical book wins out over eBooks when it comes to simplicity. Books are intuitive to use and navigate - simply open up a book and begin reading. There are no wires or cords or electrical plugs to worry about. Ink on paper is as simple as it gets.


eBook (Con) - eBooks can’t compare to physical books when it comes to simplicity. File type confusion and incompatibility (.epub as the standard format vs. the .mobi Amazon Kindle-specific format) can make buying, downloading and reading a book challenging. The un-tech savvy reader may have difficulty understanding which format is needed for which device and it just isn’t the same as picking up a printed book.


RELIANCE


Book (Pro) - The physical book wins out over eBooks when it comes to reliance. Books are stand-alone products that don’t need additional tools. Printed books do not rely on external power sources or high-tech gadgetry to be consumed. An eReader with low battery isn’t very useful during a power outage.


eBook (Con) - eBooks can’t compare to physical books when it comes to reliance. eReaders require external power for recharging, as well as software support post-purchase. Because of this reliance on external power, eReaders are of little use in remote areas or situations where there is limited access to power (ex: studying for an exam on a transatlantic flight).

SEARCHABILITY


eBook (Pro) - eBooks win out over physical books when it comes to searchability. There is a search function within every eReading platform, which enables users to quickly and easily search for keywords throughout the document. Furthermore, hyperlinking increases the reach of standard search functionality by directing users to further information on the World Wide Web.


Book (Con) - Physical books can’t compare to eBooks when it comes to searchability. It takes time to find a specific passage or topic in a book, as the reader must look up keywords in the index or flip through book to find what they are looking for. The static nature of books makes them inherently difficult to search, which can be incredibly frustrating, especially for a student conducting research.


PORTABILITY


eBook (Pro) - eBooks win out over physical books when it comes to portability. Students can carry a library’s worth of books on a very small device, which can be incredibly helpful for students who travel often. Whether commuting a short distance to school or travelling much further, eReaders are compact, lightweight and inherently portable.


Book (Con) - Physical books can’t compare to eBooks when it comes to portability. It is logistically difficult to move multiple textbooks around. Paper is heavy and it is not easily transportable across campus or across the country. Multiple bags may be necessary to lug required books from one place to another (not to mention overweight baggage fees at the airport!).


USER EXPERIENCE


eBook (Pro) - eBooks win out over physical books when it comes to user experience. Online collaboration tools built into eReading devices connect one solitary reader to another directly on the reading platform. This facilitation of connecting like-minded readers with one another fosters a community of learners who don’t feel like they are tackling the material alone (even if they are at different schools in different cities or even different parts of the world). Furthermore, social networking capabilities within eReading platforms (ex: Kobo’s Reading Life) promote conversation and lifelong learning within an online community.



Book (Con) - Physical books can’t compare to eBooks when it comes to user experience. Reading a book is a solitary experience and only one person can read a single book (comfortably) at one time. Students may feel a sense of isolation in the material they are studying because it is near to impossible to interact with other users through the platform of a physical book.


ACCESSIBILITY



eBook (Pro) - eBooks win out over physical books when it comes to accessibility. Readers can choose their preferred typeface, font size and colour contrast level to suit their accessibility needs. Furthermore, audiobooks and read-aloud capabilities are more commonly available within the newer .epub files.


Book (Con) - Physical books can’t compare to eBooks when it comes to accessibility. Small type, as well as low contrast or faded text can make a book difficult to read for someone with even a minor visual impairment. Although large-print options do exist, they are seldom available for textbooks.


CURRENCY



eBook (Pro) - eBooks win out over physical books when it comes to currency. The nature of ePublications makes it so that there is a much faster time to market, as publishers do not have to wait for the books to be manufactured and distributed (which can take weeks). Furthermore, the ability to update an .epub file is much simpler and therefore has a faster time to market than traditional ink on paper products.


Book (Con) - Physical books can’t compare to eBooks when it comes to currency. Time to market is much slower in a traditional publishing process; therefore the reader is not always reading the most current information. Updated editions of printed books do become available, but they are typically updated every few years. This can be especially critical for hi-tech fields, where the rate of technological change makes buying a textbook impractical when the information may change in a few months.

Week 13: Distributive Publishing

Welcome #NMN students to the final week of our class.

We will be having our live chat Monday night 18:15 Mountain time (31st of March). Bring your questions about Assignment 3. You will have the week to complete the assignment.

You can find the assignment in our eclass moodle and via google docs.

Jonathan Krywulak’s Storify: Transliteracy / Transmedia

COMM 597: New Media Narratives Course #NMN provided an explorative journey through the concepts of Transliteracy and Transmedia.   Through a mixture of articles, videos, blogs, tweets, images, and comments we were better able to grasp what it means to be Transliterate and the value associated with it.  My Storify provides a brief overview of Transliteracy and its relation to Transmedia Narratives, where people have the ability to create, curette, and consume content.

#NMN - #Transliteracy and #Digital Literacy

Andrea Soler's storify - #NMN review

Nicole Basaraba's Storify: Transmedia

Overall I learned a lot about transliteracy, technobiophilia, and transmedia this semester. The New Media Narratives course really inspired my personal, professional, and academic pursuits.  I wish there was a #NMN2.0 so I could learn more about these areas, but I will continue to do so on my own time. The following is a Storify highlighting three areas I focused my attention on in the #NMN course.

Diana Brown's Week #12 Review: Transliteracy

Here is my review of #transliteracy, which was an important #NMN course theme. I was able to find a range of sources across a variety of platforms (naturally!) about this topic. I think that this summary accurately captures what we learned about #transliteracy and builds on this topic with videos, tweets, blog entries, images, Facebook groups and slideshares. My #storify begins with working definitions of #transliteracy and moves into applications of #transliteracy in the realm of education. My storify ends with a thought-provoking quote about teaching and learning in our #transliterate 21st Century world. Enjoy!

Week 12: Review

This term has flown by and I've watched how you've all engaged with social media. I thought a great way to give a review of our term would be to "storify" the ebbs and flows of our discussions.

Now, I pass the Storify baton to you. For this week, as a way to review what you've learnt in the term, I would like you to create your own Storify. Here are some guidelines:

1. Choose ONE theme from our course that resonates most with you (it might be #transliteracy, or #crowdsourcing or more traditional communications modes or the idea of the "book")
2. Include a pertinent headline and mini-overview (as you can see in mine). Make sure to include our #NMN hashtag. 
3. Include various modes such as images, tweets, blogs and videos. Have at least two of each. You should have at least 10 elements in your storify.
4. Feel free to add in any text elements to elucidate or add context to a video or tweet (etc) that you're including.
5. Embed your Storify in a blog post AND write 150-200 words that explain your topic and how it relates to our course.
6.  You have the week (until Sunday) to work on your Storify review. 
7. Let me know if you have any questions!

Assignment #2 Collective Intelligence – The Impact and Benefits of Nature

By: Jonathan Krywulak

Green Fix

In this article, Naomi Lubick suggests that although past research has made a compelling case for the healing affects of nature, the direct causes related to “nature’s curative powers” (2013, p. 42) has been difficult to determine due to the medial field largely overlooking it. Lubick references E.O. Wilson who suggested nature’s restorative benefits to human beings is the result of an evolutionary process between the natural world and the human mind.  This helps to explain our “innate preference for such scenery and provide(s) clues as to why such scenes might trigger restorative brain responses” (p. 42), even if those scenes are artificially constructed.  This can possibly explain why simulated natural environments help people recover faster (deceases in heart rate and stress) in hospitals or feel better in office settings.  Artificial images of nature have the ability to generate a response from the human brain that can result in a variety of psychological and physical health benefits. According to Lubick,  “faking nature will help us hone in on exactly how the real things might be promoting healing, but more importantly, it might help bring nature’s benefits to those of us trapped in places where nature cannot follow”  (p. 44).  As technology advances, it will be interesting to see how nature continues to be simulated in the not so natural world.

Biophilia: Does Visual Contact with Nature Impact on Health and Well-Being?

Bjorn Grinde and Grete Grindal Patil examine the influence plants and other aspects of the natural world have on the human mind.  They suggest that like all other species, humans “have been shaped by forces of evolution” (2009, p. 2333) and it was particularly early in history that humans and the natural world were closely united in order to survive.  It was during this time, according to Grinde and Patil, that plants became an integral part of the human environment, thus evolving alongside the human mind.  Based on this theoretical perspective it is thought that humans “have adapted to live in a green environment” (p. 2333), and any deviation away from the environment may result in unsettling affects such as disease or reduced life quality.  I found this part of the article most interesting as provides a possible reason as to why humans seem to be more calm, comfortable, and balanced (in mind, body, & spirit) when they see or are around nature.  By being close to plants, people are experiencing what they always been accustomed to since early history.  I think in many ways this serves to explain why people have an urge to be around nature and why often times their health and well-being benefit as a result of being around it.  As noted by Grinde and Patil’s, “nature appears to have qualities useful for stress relief, mental restoration, and improved mood simply by being consciously or unconsciously “pleasing to the eye” (p. 2336).  Interaction with plants both indoors and outdoors are encouraged as it serves to benefit the human body and mind.

The Human Relation with Nature and Technological Nature

In this article, Peter Kahn questions whether or not it matters for the physical and psychological wellbeing of humans that actual nature is being replaced by technological nature. He argues that it does matter and his analysis of the question raises the concern that as we move away from actual nature “the baseline across generations for what counts as a full measure of the human experience and of human flourishing” will be lowered.  This may substantially affect the human connection to the natural world and have a negative impact on the physical and psychological well-being of humans.  In his study using plasma HDTV’s to simulate nature, Kahn came to the conclusion that real nature is better than technological nature however technological nature is in many ways better than no nature at all. The general trend provided by research suggested that “interacting with technological nature provides some but not all the enjoyments and benefits of interacting with actual nature” (2009, p. 41).   I agree with this statement as I think technology can afford humans a lot of different opportunities to connect and experience the natural world. Various technological tools have the ability to create mood and provide imagery that people can resonate with, however, I feel that interacting with real nature can generate greater benefits as it relates to physical and psychological well-being.

References

My Delicious link:
 https://delicious.com/jkreek

Lubick, N. (2013). Green fix. New Scientist, 218(2921), 42-44. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0262407913615018

Grinde, B., & Patil, GG. (2009). Biophilia: Does visual contact with nature impact on health and well-being? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 6(9), p. 2332-2343. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/a/ualberta.ca/file/d/0B21EMxFJbDZ6bnVuVldDQ28xbWs/edit?pli=1

Kahn, P., Severson, R., & Ruckert, J. (2009). The human relation with nature and technological nature. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, p. 37–42. Retrieved from http://depts.washington.edu/hints/publications/Human_Relation_Technological_Nature.pdf

Collective Intelligence: Assignment 2 - Is biophilia present in media technology and in our use of social media?

By: Andrea Soler

It has been 30 years since E. O. Wilson coined the term biophilia to talk about our “innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes” (quoted by Thomas, 2013, p. 10). Today, we can see examples of this love for life, as Wilson liked to describe it, everywhere in our architecture, interior design and arts.

More than a tendency, Kellert and Wilson believe that biophilia was “biologically encoded deep in our past at a time when sensitivity to sensory signals was crucial to our survival” (p. 123).  As the environment in which we need to survive has changed, so have our manifestations of biophilia. Based on this, Susan Thomas has developed the concept of technobiophilia applying biophilia to technology (p. 12). From interfaces, game designs and technological lingo, to our phenomenological experiences when we interact online, Thomas says that there are many expressions of biophilia in our modern technological life.

Elaborating on Thomas’s concept, I wonder if there is a resemblance between lifelike processes and our use of media technology and social media. To find some guidance to this question, I looked at three research sources: Jussi Parikka’s theories about insect media, Christakis’s TED talk about how epidemics move through social networks, and a video animation of how the flu virus enters and spreads through the human body.

In his book “Insect media: An archeology of animals and technology” (2010) Jussi Parikka looks at how insects and animals have been source of inspiration for military technology and strategies, media technology, software design and even mass communication. As an example, Parikka points out how in the 19^th century the telegraph system was compared to a spider web, not only because of the threads of its cables but because of how the system functioned by sensing the movement of information. 

Photo by: Gradders52 CC License

For Parikka (2010) insect media is not about creating metaphors such as parasite computing or bug/virus attack that aim to naturalize a cybernetic construction (p. xxi), for him it is about animals and insects having media qualities themselves. If “media is a contraction of forces of the world into specific resonating milieus” (p. xiv) and animals and insects have the faculty to transmit, record and connect, then media is not limited to human communication.

Parikka observes that insects “live in media,” as their world requires them to be always sensing, interacting and transmitting, similarly to how humans are always communicating through media technology (p. xxvii).  For Parikka the concept of media is much broader than to be a human extension, for him animals and insects are also media.

Moving from insects to epidemics, Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler have been applying network theory to figure out “How social networks predict epidemics” as presented by Christakis during his 2010 TED talk. By looking at how humans connect through social networks, the researchers have been able to observe and map how people influence each other depending on their position in the network and their relationship. The study of social networks can help visualize how social contagions, which can take the form of germs, viruses, patriotism, altruism, religion, obesity, purchasing trends, etc., works and spreads.  

Christakis 2010 TED Talk - CC License

Although the presentation focuses on how epidemics spread, what is most interesting for the purpose of my question is to be able to visualize how information moves within social networks. This presentation makes me wonder if, in the same way that viruses survive by moving from one host to the next by using social networks, have humans also learned to spread information (news, gossip, opinions, trends, etc.) by mimicking this contagion behaviour in their use of social media? 

To see if there is indeed a resemblance in how viruses spread and how we communicate through social media, I looked at Robert Krulwich and medical animator David Bolinsky’s video “Flu attack! How a virus invades your body” (2009).  This animation illustrates how the virus enters the body and tricks the cells into making millions more viruses to spread the viral information, while in the mean time the defense system reacts and restores order.

To say that the way humans move information through social media is similar to how a virus spreads based only on superficial associations from a video is not possible. However, there are a few observations and similarities that are worth mentioning. For example, the process of acceptance of the virus into the cell by having the proper “key” seems similar to the process of introductions into social networks. The way the virus spreads – by making contact with other cells that create millions of copies of the same virus – resembles how ideas or opinions are shared and spread in social media. Finally, the way the body’s immune system reacts to restore order reminded me of how often wrong information gets corrected within the network, usually by better-informed individuals. Although these observations might be far-fetched, they could also be food for thought.

Polio Virus - Photo by: Sanofi Pasteur - CC license

In conclusion, the three sources indicate that there is potential for further research in this area. Jussi Parikka’s theories show that there are non-human biophilic elements in media (although he does not use that term) and expands my narrow view of media as a human tool.

Researchers study how epidemics spread using the same network theories and mapping as they do for the diffusion of opinions, innovations and behaviours. This suggests that there might be an association between how different lifelike forms (such as viruses) and humans connect that is worth exploring. This possibility is further reinforced when we compare and see the similarities of how viruses move inside and outside the human body to spread.

In particular, Parikka’s comment “could we not (only) ask how nature is evident in our media cultures but what in media technology is already present in nature” (Parikka, 2010, p. xxi) leads me to believe that there are indeed technobiophilic elements in our design of media technology and use of social media systems.

Reference list:

Christakis N. (2010). How social networks predict epidemics. TED talk. Retrieved from:

http://www.ted.com/talks/nicholas_christakis_how_social_networks_predict_epidemics

Krulwich R. & Bolinsky’s D. (2009). Flu attack! How a virus invades your body  [Video file]. Retrieved from:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2011/06/01/114075029/flu-attack-how-a-virus-invades-your-body

Parikka, J. (2010). Insect media: An archaeology of animals and technology. Introduction: Insects in the age of technology (pp. ix -xxxiv). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Thomas, S. (2013). Technobiophilia: Nature and cyberspace. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Delicious account:

https://delicious.com/andreasolerpava

Assignment 2 - Collective Intelligence

By: Lenie Lucci

I was super interested in the ideas of technobiophilia, and the larger relationship between nature and technology. The question that inspired me, and served as the theme behind my three references was, does technology separate us from nature or bring us closer to it?

The first article I found is probably my favourite because it comes from a wiki dedicated to information about the relationship between nature/humans and technology called cyborg anthropology. The site itself states "When it comes down to it, the wiki is an extension of my brain. It’s a place to collect, store and build upon thoughts." Referencing this idea of technobiophilia in the platform itself, paralleling wikis to the human brain. This particular article discusses Mediated Reality, a concept devised by Steve Mann "to describe a mix of virtual information with visual information from the real world." The images provided to help illustrate the idea of mediated reality is what drew me to the post, and basically shows you what the world would look like with Google Glass. I think the article brings up a supporting idea about technobiophilia and the new space where nature and technology come together. Technology like Google Glass is the evolution of nature and our relationship with the world around us in the digital age - a mediated reality or a digitally enhanced experience of the world around us. Not necessarily separating us from the world around us, but providing us with a new experience/interaction with it.

The second reference is a TED Talk with Jon Nguyen, as he takes you through the incredible software he developed to help visualize space and track real-time space activity. After reading through some of the comments about the relationship between technology and nature, one argument stood out to me - that advances in technology bring us closer to a larger understanding of the world around us, and furthermore, evolve our understanding of nature beyond the limitations of our planet. This was an epiphany moment for me - of course - technology evolves our understanding which therefore evolves our relationship with the world around us. As Nguyen discusses, software like the one he is showcasing, helps our perception of space and time and brings us closer to the universe. I felt like this was the strongest and most convincing argument for me when it came to seeing technology as part of nature in an authentic way - this seems to make sense because to know your surroundings better is essentially to be more at one with them. By virtue of technology being able to simply provide us with more information about the planet and the universe does it better our relationship with nature, because we understand it more completely. 


Lastly, as kind of a nice close to this idea is a documentary that takes you through ways in which nature and technology work together to improve the overall good of our world and has been throughout history. Instances where scientists have learnt and continue to learn new things by studying nature. From the design of airplanes to biometrics, the relationship between nature and technology continues to strengthen.  This documentary brings back the basic ideas that are involved with biophilic design, that is, bringing an element of nature into the modern spaces we know occupy. The documentary does a great job of illustrating how closely nature and technology have worked to solve problems and progress the human species over history, and actually, technology and nature seem to have quite a symbiotic relationship
.

After really looking into it, I would have to say that nature and technology are not only closely related already, but the knowledge provided to us by advances in technology brings us closer to understanding and interacting with the world around us.

References

My Delicious link:
https://delicious.com/lenielucci


Mediated Reality - Cyborg Anthropology (Content Managed by Amber Case, Cyborg Anthropologist) 

The Solar System in Your Grasp by Jon Ngyuen


When Nature and Technology Combine
Documentary Written by Alfred Vendl and Steve Nicholls