I have a hard time believing you sincerely think reading is “basically identical” to TV in terms of the mindlessness of the activity, by any reasonable definition of the word “mindless”.
Facebook is not mostly drivel, it’s mostly a computerized manifestation of its users’ lives.
I’ve no idea what sort of distinction you are making.
and you keep track of party plans and weddings and deaths.
Like a calendar?
As for reading forcing you to mentally create audio and visual stimuli, that’s never been my experience. I’m an avid reader, and I read the words on the page. Descriptive text is basically lost on me, because I’m simply not imagining what the characters look like. I may possibly be capable of turning a written description of someone’s looks into a mental picture of them, but I can’t think of a time when I have actually done so.
Noted.
And no, bad Facebook memes aggravate me. But they’re better than no writing at all. Reading and writing may be getting less classy on average, but that’s because more people are doing it, and plebs gonna pleb.
I’m a pleb. And it’s ludicrous to say every meme is good. Every meme created exhibits non-zero intelligence and is therefore evidence of skill in language...so… I guess you’ve technically made some sort of point.
I sincerely think that the mediums of TV and books are largely the same in intellectual requirements(subject to necessary levels of literacy, of course). I think the sort of people who read a lot of books and don’t watch much TV read intellectual books and come across drivel on TV, which gives them a false impression, but the same thing happens the other way for someone who watches Breaking Bad religiously and only comes across Fifty Shades of Grey as far as books go. The choice of medium is, so far as I can tell, completely irrelevant. Passive entertainment is passive entertainment. Now, if you were comparing either one to computer games I’d say the games win an a heartbeat, but books = TV = radio = movies = plays = listening to your buddies bullshit over a couple drinks.
The distinction I’m making is that Facebook is only drivel if your friends lead drivelly lives. If you have interesting friends, Facebook is an interesting place. And I was unaware that calendars inform me of my friends getting hatched, matched, and dispatched. Here I just thought they told me what date it was.
I have a hard time believing you sincerely think reading is “basically identical” to TV in terms of the mindlessness of the activity, by any reasonable definition of the word “mindless”.
I’ve no idea what sort of distinction you are making.
Like a calendar?
Noted.
I’m a pleb. And it’s ludicrous to say every meme is good. Every meme created exhibits non-zero intelligence and is therefore evidence of skill in language...so… I guess you’ve technically made some sort of point.
Tap.
I sincerely think that the mediums of TV and books are largely the same in intellectual requirements(subject to necessary levels of literacy, of course). I think the sort of people who read a lot of books and don’t watch much TV read intellectual books and come across drivel on TV, which gives them a false impression, but the same thing happens the other way for someone who watches Breaking Bad religiously and only comes across Fifty Shades of Grey as far as books go. The choice of medium is, so far as I can tell, completely irrelevant. Passive entertainment is passive entertainment. Now, if you were comparing either one to computer games I’d say the games win an a heartbeat, but books = TV = radio = movies = plays = listening to your buddies bullshit over a couple drinks.
The distinction I’m making is that Facebook is only drivel if your friends lead drivelly lives. If you have interesting friends, Facebook is an interesting place. And I was unaware that calendars inform me of my friends getting hatched, matched, and dispatched. Here I just thought they told me what date it was.