Comments on: wikipedia & bad writing http://hughmcguire.net/2007/02/13/wikipedia-bad-writing/ at the intersection of technology, philosophy, and politics (and some other things). Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:51:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Hugh http://hughmcguire.net/2007/02/13/wikipedia-bad-writing/#comment-18 Hugh Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:28:34 +0000 http://hughmcguire.net/?p=57#comment-18 yeah, I think blogging & much web text (say, forums) are culturally closer to oral communication than to writing in many ways. certainly in comment threads. but maybe that's my concern. Is there a problem if we get sloppier in our writing? Is it true that writing in general is getting "better" or "worse"? I wonder: the net has turned millions and millions into public writers. But I suppose thats the point, that previously the majority of writing we were exposed to was professional, and edited. Now anything goes. Which has some good results, and possibly some bad. yeah, I think blogging & much web text (say, forums) are culturally closer to oral communication than to writing in many ways. certainly in comment threads.

but maybe that’s my concern. Is there a problem if we get sloppier in our writing? Is it true that writing in general is getting “better” or “worse”? I wonder: the net has turned millions and millions into public writers.

But I suppose thats the point, that previously the majority of writing we were exposed to was professional, and edited. Now anything goes. Which has some good results, and possibly some bad.

]]> By: Chris Hughes http://hughmcguire.net/2007/02/13/wikipedia-bad-writing/#comment-17 Chris Hughes Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:55:06 +0000 http://hughmcguire.net/?p=57#comment-17 Your post refers to two separate issues: grammatical errors, and writing that, although 'correct', is unclear in meaning. On the internet I am very tolerant of grammatical errors (in anyone except myself, for some reason) just as I am with speech. But I am not with printed media. I have a small theory about this. Once, when I was studying Homer, I was told by my tutor how hard it was to imagine a truly 'oral' culture, which Homer must have occupied, where speech was the only form of transferring information. At the time, it struck me that this was wrong. What is television, radio or cinema, but oral? It is certainly not written. And these, at the time (5 years ago?), were the most popular means of transferring information. Since then, the internet has overtaken these older forms of media for many people. Maybe, at last, we are leaving oral culture behind. During my childhood having anything published was a very big deal. Any errors would be reproduced vastly, and there was no way to correct them in 'the wild'. The internet brings many of the benefits of publishing without the debilitating permanence, and expense. So, perhaps our writing has become more 'verbal', full of hesitation and repetition. Imagine the care employed by a scribe, where every pen stroke was a disaster waiting to happen. Word processors took us a long way from that. And maybe the web has set us free at last. Sory for long posst. Your post refers to two separate issues: grammatical errors, and writing that, although ‘correct’, is unclear in meaning.
On the internet I am very tolerant of grammatical errors (in anyone except myself, for some reason) just as I am with speech. But I am not with printed media. I have a small theory about this.
Once, when I was studying Homer, I was told by my tutor how hard it was to imagine a truly ‘oral’ culture, which Homer must have occupied, where speech was the only form of transferring information. At the time, it struck me that this was wrong. What is television, radio or cinema, but oral? It is certainly not written. And these, at the time (5 years ago?), were the most popular means of transferring information.
Since then, the internet has overtaken these older forms of media for many people. Maybe, at last, we are leaving oral culture behind. During my childhood having anything published was a very big deal. Any errors would be reproduced vastly, and there was no way to correct them in ‘the wild’. The internet brings many of the benefits of publishing without the debilitating permanence, and expense.
So, perhaps our writing has become more ‘verbal’, full of hesitation and repetition.
Imagine the care employed by a scribe, where every pen stroke was a disaster waiting to happen. Word processors took us a long way from that. And maybe the web has set us free at last.
Sory for long posst.

]]>