More, or Less?

The common thread I have extracted from this weeks posts is the evolution of media to a more compact form. Presently, most communication occurs in small bits. This is through text messages and emails, news tickers, blogs :), 140-character-limit twitter posts, etc. In other words, there is less depth in the information we receive today. We are bombarded with it, but its kind of like eating a pound of penny-candy, rather than sticking to the guidelines of the food pyramid. Three well-balanced meals a day.

Prosavec's diagram interested me quite a bit. It would be interesting to make this study testing the evolution of writing style over a period of time. The question being: is the way in which we receive our information today affecting literature?

I think digitization of information itself will ultimately effect the interpretation of the written work. If you press command - f in a digitized acrobat file you can search for any word or phrase you can think of. If all media is accessible in this way, research would be change dramatically (and maybe not for good). You could cherry-pick ideas from a vast number of sources misinterpreting information that requires a full chapter of reading to fully understand. This tendency toward expediency that is aided by technology is something that is really beginning to bother me. I think we might be training society of people that are satisfied with a cursory inspection of the Truth. I think that is potential dangerous. Access to "More" can be "Less".