how deer u call me an ill literit?
It really doesn't help the way the publishing industry runs things, either. It's getting harder and harder to be a successful fiction writer, because the "midlist" is vanishing. The midlist used to be the collection of just ordinary books that would sell a decent amount of copies, but weren't particularly given any special publicity or anything.
In other words, there used to be a lot more variety in fiction publishing than there is now. Now, the prevailing ethos is more or less, "Go big or go home." No wonder people don't read; they can't find anything worth reading. If neither Stephen King nor the contents of Oprah's Book Club do it for you, you're screwed.
Now, the prevailing ethos is more or less, "Go big or go home."
Sounds like the blockbuster summer movie phenomenon.
I read an article yesterday about the book business in 2006 in the US. The amazing thing was that the number of book sold was 3.1BU or 10 per person. If the 80% number is correct that makes it 50 / person. Clearly something is wrong.
please show some references!!!
These numbers (if true) do seem pretty bleak. I wonder, though, if it's really as bad as that. How many people who don't read books read newspapers? Or magazines? Or articles found on reddit or digg?
The "functional illiteracy" you write about does not portend well for our use of language. In general, we are losing our ability to communicate effectively -- at least in writing. This is a problem.
It's also indicative of our "soundbyte culture". People don't read books because they don't have the patience, and even if they did they don't have the time. Modern culture is not conducive to quiet, contemplative time alone with a book. I think this is also a problem.
But people are informed not only from books. I think there's just as much, if not more, information out there: it's just accessed differently. Plato lamented the written word and romanticized societies who could only communicate verbally. Is this so different?
I wonder how many people quote statistics without researching if they are valid or not. 99.9%?
What about library usage?
I wonder if library circulation is down also. I bet library usage is up only because of computers and it is a cool, chill place to be in the summer.
I've got a student right now in the 9th grade who told me the other day that he has only read one entire book in his entire life....Maniac McGee...and he really didn't even know the name of it.
I bet these statistics are pretty accurate.
Another problem is that most of those people who read, probably read only the bible. In that case, being illiterate would be an improvement.
Who cares if the public reads newspapers? It's actually better if they don't, because newspapers answer to their advertisers (their real customers) and their owners, not to the readership. For the price of two years of newspaper subscription, you can get a computer and internet access, which gives you access to more than one paper, and much more information. Newspapers are for suckers.
Please fix your Web pages. The name of the Web page whould match the title of the post - it should not be the nae of your blog.
Thanks
Although I'm frustrated by the lack of cultural intelligence around me, I completely agree with Ben. Measuring literacy or knowledge in terms of book sales/reading can't give an accurate picture of people's literacy anymore.
Can you please add sources for the statistics?
Thanks,
mikealao
Reading a printed book isn't the only thing that defines literacy. I'm working on my third university degree. I guarantee that I could pass any test of functional literacy that you could throw at me. Yet, I haven't read a book from beginning to end in at least five years. I'm too busy, and I get what I need and enjoy from the Internet.
Those statistics seem pretty sketchy. The sources trace back to various "self-publishing" companies. They make money by having authors pay them to publish their books. In other words, it's in their interest to convince authors that it's very difficult to publish a book, so they'd better pay them a lot of money to help with it.
I'm not disagreeing with the general sentiment of your post, I think people are getting way too ignorant. But if you're going to cite statistics at least get them from a reputable source and not from the marketing material of a company with a vested interest in them.
70% of books published are unprofitable? How can that possibly be true? How are publishing companies still in business then? If that were true then the remaining 30% would not only have to be profitable, they'd have to be extremely profitable to make up for the rest that lost money.
Hello anonymous pairodimes blogger!
I'm with several other commenters here: please show us that you are literate and discerning by providing some credible provenance for those stats.
Thanks!
A quick Google search reveals that those stats are from "Jerry Jenkins" of http://www.jenkinsgroup.com which doesn't seem to actually exist.
However, Para Publishing has reproduced these statistics at their website here, http://www.parapublishing.com/si.../
statistics.cfm.
They seem to believe the stats, but they actually reproduce MANY stats on that page, quite a few with no sources, so that seems pretty suspect as well.
Honestly, those stats are pretty hard to believe. Maybe I just hang out with the "cool kids", but I can promise you that MANY more than 20 % of my friends (all college grads) read books on a regular basis.
There's more to literacy than just books. I read only 1-2 books a year but read for at least an hour a day on the internet - RSS, news sites, etc. And I am a published author.
I'm sure the general drift is correct, even most 'intelligent' friends of mine are not book-readers. My ~2 books/month is pulling up the average, I guess.
As to the numbers quoted, 99.34% of statistics are pulled out of someone's ass.
I was shocked when a friend told me about the stats gotten from this page. But after reading I have to admit the data given is extremely loose and terribly bias. It really doesnt matter about new books being published in relation to literacy rates. Americans by international stereotype are generally uneducated/stupid - thats a given but top list book sales doesnt really count as an fact to prove it. Hey it only looks at a tiny sample of the population aka times readers (?) or those w/ a borders book/cafe in their local mall.
Dare i also point out the idea that perhaps browsing a bookstore and choosing a book not listed might also be a little more enlightening rather than the latest craze novel?
References as to where the data comes from would be lovely.
The author of this blog may be literate and superior in their book reading as they go through the weekly top 10 but doesnt seem to know the basics of writing an article w/references.
Finally how does reading a romance novel censor information? Doesnt it just limit the information you take in personally, how is it affecting the information available to the next guy.
Scary Stats.
"1/3 of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives."
My daughter made a good point when hearing this statistic. She says that 75% of her high school graduating class are going on to college. That invalidates this statistic.
well i am a high school student, and these stats look pretty accurate. in my school (san francisco area), about half of the class wont even read an assigned book, much less for enjoyment.
Commenting by HaloScan
