Collide Magazine

A lot of ink has been spilled and pixels projected in the debate over whether e-books will overtake print and leave physical libraries to rot. Slate recently featured an online article that addresses this question (Bold Prediction: Why eBooks Will Never Replace Real Books), with Jan Swafford declaring that despite those ready to carve the headstone for all of print media, both forms will endure. Surveying the vast history of new media, she writes:

So real books and e-books will coexist. That has happened time and again with other new technologies that were prophesied to kill off old ones. Autos didn’t wipe out horses. Movies didn’t finish theater. TV didn’t destroy movies. E-books won’t destroy paper and ink. The Internet and e-books may set back print media for a while, and they may claim a larger audience in the end. But a lot of people who care about reading will want the feel, the smell, the warmth, the deeper intellectual, emotional, and spiritual involvement of print.

This article is solid reading for those interested in the history of media, and for those with knowledge of the writings of Marshall McLuhan many of the ideas will be familiar. But for those with little experience in reading McLuhan, the overview presented here is lucid and helpful, and is accompanied by some of Swafford’s own excellent observations on how both reading and writing have changed as the practice of reading has transitioned from the printed page to the screen.

As those who lead churches, understanding new developments in media and the differences they make for human thought are critical for our work in ministry. Discerning these shifts enable us to communicate more effectively, listen more deeply, and envision the future more clearly. This article is a good source for reflection.

(Editor’s Note: The following is a guest post from Katie Strandlund. Thanks again, Katie!)

I have recently taken to reading TIME Magazine when I’m in the waiting room at my chiropractor’s office. It’s time in a different medium, one that isn’t glowing in front of me, and it’s different content than what I normally consume. Recently, I ran across this ad, which currently appears in a number of print publications:

We surf the Internet.

We swim in magazines.

The Internet is exhilarating. Magazines are enveloping.

The Internet grabs you. Magazines embrace you.

The Internet is impulsive. Magazines are immersive.

And both media are growing.

Barely noticed amidst the thunderous Internet clamor is the simple fact that magazine readership has risen over the past five years. Even in the age of the Internet, even among the groups one would assume are more singularly hooked on digital media, the appeal of magazines is growing.

Think of it this way: during the 12-year life of Google, magazine readership actually increased 11 percent.

What it proves, once again, is that a new medium doesn’t necessarily displace an existing on. Just as movies didn’t kill radio. Just as TV didn’t kill movies. An established medium can continue to flourish so long as it continues to offer a unique experience. And, as reader loyalty and growth demonstrate, magazines do.

Which is why people aren’t giving up swimming, just because they also enjoy surfing.

– (TIME Magazine April 19,2010)

I think there are some nuggets of wisdom buried in there. But I’m curious about your thoughts. Do you agree? Disagree? In your opinion, what magazines are surviving and why? Do the strengths and weaknesses of a particular medium influence the ways you use that medium?

Over the past several weeks, the use of tools like foursquare and Gowalla has exploded within my social network. I’ve been aware of these technologies for quite some time, but it hasn’t been until recently that a number of the pastors and leaders with whom I’m connected have begun alerting the world to their latest moves. Now I’m privy to when my friends work out or when they visit Dunkin’ Donuts. Sometimes I wonder why I should care.

For those of you who use these social location technologies, why do you do so?  And how have these tools served your ministry?

Also, if any of you have read excellent resources on these tools and how they can be used effectively, I’d love for you to share your sources. If you use these tools, you blog, and you’ve provided your rationale for using these tools, I’d be grateful for the link. And if you have objections to these tools, I would like to read your thoughts as well.

This is an opportunity for our intelligent, media savvy community here at COLLIDE to teach me something. I can’t wait to see what you have to say.

I don’t know what took me so long, but I’ve only recently gotten into podcasts. I’ve subscribed to a few in the past, and heck, I even publish one, but now I’m an avid podcast subscriber. Specifically, I’ve really come to love two podcasts.

The Moth bills itself as “true stories told live without notes,” and you never quite know what you’re going to get. The podcasts features audio recorded by The Moth team at one of their live events — usually it’s an author, but not always — and the storyteller delivers a 10- to 20-minute narrative about something that happened to them. It’s almost always fascinating and well-told.

This American Life is a show on Chicago Public Radio that is hosted by Ira Glass. Each week, the program examines a given topic (from the financial crisis to babysitting) through a series of compelling stories and interviews. The name says it all — it’s about life in America.

I highly recommend both (though I feel I must protect myself by throwing out a content disclaimer) because they both celebrate the power and beauty of story. I think all communicators — preachers, teachers, designers, video guys, web devs, photographers, etc. — should begin to view themselves as storytellers, and thus I think we can all learn a lot from the art and stories that flow through the Moth and TAL feeds. Locate them in the iTunes Store and subscribe, please.

Oh, and while you’re at it, do me a huge favor and recommend your favorite podcast or two. I’m search of a few more feeds for my weekly listening/viewing pleasure.

The other day I came across a passage of Scripture that got me thinking. Here’s what 2 John 1:12 has to say:

I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.

John wasn’t condemning paper and ink. In fact, that sentiment was recorded using paper and ink. And yet he yearned to talk with his readers face to face.

John’s short letter to a group of people he cared about was important. He was writing to encourage them in their faith and warn them about false teachers. He used available media — paper and ink — to communicate meaningful spiritual truth across a physical distance. In fact, this letter is so meaningful that it was determined to be inspired by the Holy Spirit and thus canonized as part of the Bible. And yet he yearned to talk with his readers face to face.

Much of the communication we do today serves to bridge physical distance. We blog, tweet, text, email, IM, call, and sometimes we even use paper and ink. It’s my belief that these are all valid media by which some level of meaningful spiritual truth can be communicated.

We live in incredibly technologically advanced times — we have mobile Internet access and iPads and particle accelerators and nanobots. And yet we still yearn for face to face contact.

I think we should use available media like John and the other apostles did (with a healthy dose of discernment, of course), but that doesn’t mean we can denigrate the importance of being with someone face to face. I heard Shane Hipps say that God gave us our bodies for a reason, that Jesus’ incarnation happened for a reason. As humans we have a powerful gift to give others — our presence. Let’s blog, tweet, and email when we’re separated by physical distance, but let’s also embody John’s desire to spend time with people face to face. As the old Texas Troubadour Ernest Tubb once sang, “Letters got no arms.”