Can online versions of texts replace the traditional reading of books?

Physical forms of texts vs electronic versions

With developments and trends towards digital media and electronic resources, traditional forms of texts are being made redundant.  Online reading of books, magazines and newspapers has become increasingly popular due to the compactable nature of the reading source and the ease of accessibility of the electronic resource.   The reading can be downloaded to a device or accessed via the internet or applications.  Instead of carrying around multiple books, many resources can be carried around on a single screen.  Another advantage of the electronic resource is its ability to expand fonts for individuals with eyesight issues.

However sensory elements including the sound of pages turning and the smell and feel of books only able to be experienced with the physical form of texts still attract readers to obtain the actual object.  It is the tactile features associated with reading the  physical forms of texts which give a sense of pleasure and enable the reader to feel a sense of achievement in regards to what they are reading.  In particular, as opposed to electronic versions of books where the number of pages read appears only as a number, having the actual object infront of the reader enables them to see how much they have read and how many more pages until the end of the chapter/book. As well as this, the back the backlighting on computers and tablets has been one of the negatives of reading online criticised due to the strain it places on individual’s eyes.  

It is these issues, which have led to debate about whether electronic versions of books, magazines and newspapers can replace traditional methods of reading.  Yet, e-paper technology overcomes problems with online reading by simulating the look of text on paper.  These technologies do not use backlighting, have a better contrast ratio, use less battery life and have a low refresh rate making them better and easier for human eyes to read.

Authorship on Twitter

Does Authorship exist on Twitter?

An element authorship involves the publishing of ideas under a name.  If we take this ‘definition’ as such then authorship on twitter is far from dead.  On twitter, each user has a personal account and any comment made by an individual can be attributed back to their account name.  It is this name that we ultimately associate the comment or message with and who is thus the author of this idea. 

As well as this, the underlying purpose of tweeting is to publicise an individuals ideas whether it be privately to another person or made public for anyone to view.  The message in a “tweet” is connected to a profile who through publishing their ideas online receives recognition by others for their work and therefore becomes an author themselves. Thus it can be said that of the idea of authorship relies on the assumption that authorship entails capital.  Whether this capital is financial, scientific, personal or a form of social recognition the purpose of the individual (who becomes an author) is to document ideas in order to receive a reward. By publishing an idea online, which is in connection with a profile identity, attention is given to the author of the comment and an attribution is made by all those who read it to the author.  Hence the “tweeter” receives some sort of capital from publishing their ideas on twitter whether the tweeter be a prominent celebrity or a local neighbour.  Both are authors.

Furthermore, the act of re-tweeting although not an "original" idea as such still involves an interpretation of ideas and a reformulation of others ideas from the perspective of another preson.  Because the new tweeter publishes their ideas on line on order to receive some sort of capital they too become an another author.