the new literacy (esther's response)

In the ongoing debate of whether technology is advancing or stunting our writing as a whole, Clive Thompson suggests that it is, in fact, a good thing. In his recent article in WIRED magazine, ‘The New Literacy,’ he suggests that while on the surface it may seem like students today should be regressing as writers they are proving the exact opposite. A study done by Professor Andrea Lunsford of Stanford University claims a “literacy revolution” is breathing new life into the world of writing, both in and outside the classroom.
Professor John Sutherland of the University College of London slanders this generation’s language as “bleak, bald, sad shorthand;” pointing to online accounts such as Facebook, Twitter and blogging in general as culprits. Although Thompson does not say so directly, he apparently assumes that those same sites are not only getting us to write but also motivating us as writers to improve on and grow in our style and delivery in order to reach and speak to a broader audience. To say that writers today are more egotistical is irrefutable, but does that fact overshadow the reality that today’s writers have adapted their tone and put forth a more compelling argument in order to be heard? And for any writer, shouldn’t that alone be the ultimate goal?
On the one hand I agree that by no means is emailing, texting or blogging going to render my generations writers inept or unable to compose intelligent and thought provoking works. We are constantly online expressing ourselves, whether we’re sending emails or a stream of consciousness (i.e. blogging); we are still furthering ourselves where writing is concerned. In this new era where we literally have the world at our fingertips, if a writer wants to have an audience it is necessary to create thoughtful, well informed and well articulated material.
On the other hand I do see how modern technology is bastardizing the English language. As an avid text junkie I have been the recipient of innumerable messages filled with misspelled words, sentence fragments and acronyms I don’t understand. I feel the overwhelming use and acceptance of shorthand as a form of everyday writing is unacceptable. Do we have so little time that we can’t type ‘talk to you later’ instead of TTYL? Are we really that lazy? Furthermore, does being able to express yourself constitute being a good writer?
Even with LOL and its counterparts littering conversations, both verbal and written, Professor Lunsford found no evidence of them anywhere in the academic writing of first year students. I’d like to see the same type of study done in a less formal setting. An Ivy League education makes for somewhat biased results. Regardless of how many emails or texts a student might compose throughout the course of their schooling, the foundation for critical and intellectual prose are already in place. It is simply second nature.
As far as text speak and blogging go, they are new additions to our writing culture and therefore it is too early to judge their impact on our writing skills. When the next generation of writers is of college age their writing will be an indication of whether technology is advancing or stunting our literary abilities.