1995: Internet replace stores, books? You're kidding!

An Internet store? Never happen. (Image from sxc.hu)

Here's a blast from the past:

Back in 1995, the Internet was the Big New Thing. Folks were getting used to the idea that you can go to any library anywhere, "talk" to anyone, and experience some of the world without ever leaving your seat.

But to Clifford Stoll, it was just a fad. He offered his views in Newsweek early that year, saying that while the Internet was pretty cool, it wouldn't really catch on or be truly useful.

Stoll said:

"Do our computer pundits lack all common sense? The truth in no online database will replace your daily newspaper, no CD-ROM can take the place of a competent teacher and no computer network will change the way government works."

Stoll wasn't a technophobe. He'd been involved in the online world from the jump. Helped track down some computer crackers who stole military secrets and sold them to the KGB. And he has a little online business going now.

But back then, he knew computers would not replace books or newspapers. He knew it. Check it out:

"How about electronic publishing? Try reading a book on disc. At best, it's an unpleasant chore: the myopic glow of a clunky computer replaces the friendly pages of a book. And you can't tote that laptop to the beach. Yet Nicholas Negroponte, director of the MIT Media Lab, predicts that we'll soon buy books and newspapers straight over the Intenet. Uh, sure."

He said ecommerce wouldn't work all that well because, well, there's little human contact involved. Same thing with the rest of the Internet -- takes away that eyeball-to-eyeball. It's that same dynamic that author John Naisbitt pointed out in the 1982 book Megatrends -- that push-pull between high-tech and high-touch. 

Less than two decades after Naisbitt's book, and about five years after Stoll's predictions, high tech won the war.

Still, take a look at Stoll's Newsweek article. While you're about it, read the comments. The whole thing is a hoot. 

###

Link: Clifford Stoll's Web site.

HuffPo: Children are more likely to own a cell phone than a book

The numbers may be a little suspect, but it doesn't surprise me. 

I got this from The Huffington Post:

Children Are More Likely To Own A Cell Phone Than A Book, Study Says: "

Almost nine-in-10 pupils now have a mobile compared with fewer than three-quarters who have their own books in the home, it was disclosed ... the study by the National Literacy Trust suggested a link between regular access to books outside school and high test scores ... 

You can take this info and unpack it any way you like. We've already noticed kids don't read, and they grow up into adults who also don't read. Then they raise more children who don't read. Nothing new there.

Bottom line, parents: If you want your kids to read, set the example. Read to them. Read for yourself. Even if you grow up to be a totally evil uncool unhip parent (usually when the child hits about age 12), there's a chance some of that influence may stick. 

A generation ago, my friend Marco and I were bemoaning the popularity of Nintendo, which was the kiddie toy of the day. "We're raising a generation of Nintidiots," was how Marco put it.

But if Marco, a reader and guitar player, was reading this news article he might wonder how many of these pupils today have a guitar in their homes. And we're not talking about Guitar Hero either.

###