Reading Response 1--The New Literacy

In his essay, “The New Literacy,” Clive Thompson suggests that technology is a turning point in literacy, expanding the range of audiences allowing more opportunities for writing. Thompson supports Andrea Lunsford in verifying the benefits of technology induced writing to expose the general belief that computer programs, internet social networking sites, and texting are in fact not feeding any sort of flame to illiteracy. Thompson believes that the technology available serves more as the new direction writing has taken. He refuses the argument that these new ways of writing are sloppy and casual by revealing the fact that this generation is writing more—they are writing socially as well as academically, expanding their audiences and writing more than any generation has before them. One of the most important points made in “The New Literacy,” is the new clientele of readers. As the purpose of a piece of writing evolves from solely English class essays, the audience is shifting and changing along with it. Thompson makes the point that it was found that this generation has the ability to know their audience and judge their style of writing accordingly. Technology isn’t killing writing, but creating new, modern writing techniques.

I believe that the common conception of new technology is thought of as damaging toward writing and literacy. Previous generations seem to look down on technology and deem it laziness. To be honest, I never considered Facebook or texting writing, but something of its own—second nature to my generation. I guess I would have considered myself loosely related to those like John Sutherland, who claims, “…texting has dehydrated language into ‘bleak, bald, sad shorthand.’” Reading, “The New Literacy,” opened my eyes to things that seemed so embedded into my life. A friend of mine lives in Seattle, WA, roughly 90 miles away from me. In the past year this friend of mine has sent me 726 text messages. My experience supports this new way of communication as a new form of literacy, Thompson would say. The claim in which Sutherland makes insisting that language is turning writing into blabbering, is unreasonable, as there is no comparison. Comparing a research paper to a post card would be similar to comparing a college entrance essay with a text message. They are two very separate forms of writing to very separate audiences.

If audience assessment is being carefully sifted, as Thompson and Lunsford have found, the alternate texting and Facebook writing are additional forms of writing. This added writing builds on itself infusing creativity into the writing process. Because of all of their opportunities to write via the internet and cell phones, Lunsford claims young people are proficient in kairos—assessing their audience and adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across. Audience gives a writer purpose. The technological generation of writers crave attention to what they share on the internet for the world to see, what they text for their peers to understand their feelings, and for teachers to experience their abilities. The new forms of technology are ways in which young writers can build confidence and passion into their writing.