Online versus print: weigh in

The following debate originally appeared in the last issue of Communicator. We’re reprising it here, so members can weigh in. Another point for online, I’d say. Barb

Online smacks down print
by Barb Sawyers

Why do we need to argue whether online or print is the ultimate form of communication? Clearly, online wins.

I wrote this on a computer and sent it via email. Marcia replied the same way. Now it’s on our site.

Okay, so Communicator continues in print because some readers prefer it that way, just as I prefer to read my paper newspaper lying on the couch with a coffee while the morning fog lifts.

But as the newspapers have, we should let readers decide how they want to read Communicator. I’d love to see an online version. Not a one-way PDF that no one can find, but one with a place for comments, links to podcasts and videos, and frequent updating.

In fact, this is where I’d like to go with our blog. Now thee moved the debate up the media chain, I can’t ask readers what they think. So please weigh on, though be polite and pretend to listen to Marcia’s side first.

Yes, print is a terrific way to proofread. Online platform developers, please note. But though vital, I would hardly call proofreading a high art. I prefer to edit online because you can copy the original, then try lots of ways to reorganize and tighten.

Back in the pre-computer days, when we had to make changes with messy corrector fluid, I thought and edited much less than I do today. Don’t pretend you don’t remember, Marcia.

Yes, there’s a lot of raw, messy stuff online, but as competition increases and new monetization models emerge, I think we’re going to see less of that and more of the high-minded writing and luscious visuals we expect from the online alternatives of the publications Marcia mentions.

As for all the great literature in print, you could not wrestle my e-reader away from me any more than you could snatch my laptop. The e-readers even come loaded with classics. What’s more, I’m looking forward to seeing how serious literature and thought evolve now that they’ve been freed from the shackles of print.

Print is for thinkers
by Marcia Ross

Why are we having this debate? Let me start with a metric. Every report on paper use shows that it has soared since we started using computers. Clearly, humans love print. Print is tangible. Print is lasting.

Why else are we still printing so much? Because tangibility brings responsibility and greater care.

When we finish our second draft of our proposal for a better world, we print it out. There we do far more than just find the typos. We see the places that need shoring up, the gaps in logic, the sections that deserve
greater glory.

Online, by contrast, exists for the recording of quickly arrived-at-carelessly-articulated conclusions. Blogs.Forums. Facebook. The too aptly named Twitter.

Print is where the great books live. (And no, e-books do not cut it.) Print is the real home of The Economist and The New York Times, the place where journalists have to state their sources and put their copy through an editor. (For which they are paid. Think about it.)

Print is settling down on the dock at the cottage with something you can learn to love held happily between your paws.

Print is what helps everyone at an organization sing from the same song sheet. Create good collateral, create great printed materials, and you begin to build a strong shared understanding of your true value prop, your culture, and your goals. Internally and externally, you will begin to resonate at the same frequency, Try to do that with online messaging!

Print is lasting. Print is the L.L. Bean or the MEC catalogue, living in your bathroom until at least the change of season.

Print is for teaching the next generation to read, at bedtime…as your eyelids twitch and your arms warm to the sleepy body of the toddler held within them. And print, of course, is Communicator, well loved, well read, well worthwhile.

What do you think? Log in and let us know.