Short Attention Span Theater

I was going to devote this entry to short attention span. I'll at least open up that way. I've been reading reddit a lot. I like it's compact presentation over Digg though I do like that Digg has different categorizations like technology, science, etc. reddit also has sub-reddits, but not in the areas I care about.

I'd imagine that many people read many articles from reddit (or Digg). For example, I might look at 15-20 articles a day. For me to reasonably complete the article, each article has to be short. If an article goes over, say 2-3 pages, my interest wanes quickly. If I'm asked to devote 20-30 minutes to read an article, that's too much.

This may seem hypocritical of me to say that. I often write many pages in my blog. I don't mind my own length, even if readers lose interest. Certainly my interest is always maintained because I write every word, and that keeps me actively engaged.

Now some of the reason I won't read an article that long is because it simple doesn't engage me. For one reason or another, I just can't stay compelled to sit and read the whole thing. Maybe it's trying to teach something to me that's deep. Sorry, I generally don't have time for that. A cool, simple idea is enough.

I did read a fairly engaging story of a man in England who saw a drunken guy berating a woman, apparently, his fiancee. He felt he had to intefere. However, this fellow was somewhat old and slow. He had learned a lesson from his elders when he was 20. He said you had to hurt someone when you're old and slow, otherwise they get an advantage from youth and speed.

While reading this, I felt the tension in this whole setup, imagining what this was like. How he ended up punching the guy over and over. This is the kind of visceral violence done in the name of justice that I wouldn't imagine myself in, but I could imagine seeing it in a film.

Point is, for whatever reason, that story had me engaged. For example, there was a good article on women in education and how they are faring better than men because of their attitudes. It's in the New York Times. I'm sure it's well written. But I'm not always 100% alert. It's also frickin 6 pages long. If I were to read this outside the context of the just browsing the times, I might actually read it.

You know how it is, that some people, when they wake up in the morning, as part of their morning ritual, they fetch the daily paper and start to read it (although I read mine online). They are choosing to focus their attention on one single news source (the newspaper) and spend a good amount of time reading it (like 30 minutes to an hour).

Because of this, they are willing to look at a longer article and choose to read it.

Now, this blog entry is already getting pretty long, and since you're not invested in reading my blog, you probably haven't reached this point, but if you have, well, you have lots of patience.

People have often said my blog entries are too long. This is similar to the effect I go through when I read something long. But I don't necessarily care. I write for myself. I like to write. I don't mind if a few people take a few minutes to read (or not). That's up to them. Or you.

Ah, so I had another topic in mind, but I think it's related. I wonder if my friends have even shorter attention spans than me. But I think it's a matter of expectations. Let's say you're interested in all things Boston Red Sox. Let's say you're interested in strategy or statistics and you read a columnist who has insightful things to say. Then, you might be willing to read a very lengthy article on the subject.

Are you willing to read lengthy articles by me about random stuff? I know people who have read my stuff for quite different reasons. One person likes tennis and reads an Andre Agassi article. Another likes movies and reads something about that. Do blog surfers have more patience to read stuff? Many of these readers are unlikely to be regulars because any one blog is really tough to find.

To effectively surf blogs, you have to use some kind of search, and be rather topic specific in that search. If you're looking for tennis, and read a review on say, Pirates of the Carribean, then your interest may wane. It's not tennis, so why read it?

It's said that people have less attention than they did many years ago. That may be a fallout from the proliferation of information now as opposed to many years ago. We were willing to spend more time reading before because we didn't know any better. Everyone simply wrote lengthy stuff.

To give you an analogy, in Asian countries, many people distrust credit cards. Why, I don't know. Thus, people carry cash. Lots of it. You might have 20-30 bucks in your wallet, maybe upwards of a hundred bucks. A typical Asian is likely to carry the equivalent of two or three hundred dollars. Stuff you'd automatically use credit, they pay in cash.

You would think this makes them vulnerable to thieves. But everyone carries this much cash. No one thinks it's a lot of money.

Similarly, people used to reading long articles don't think they have to complete their reading in five minutes. They're willing to spend half an hour on it or more. But then there was so much less information to get. You might read a book, but when you're done, that's it. You'd have to go get a new book. With the Internet, you can read for the rest of your life.

If you want to get a real sense of short attention span, try looking at the Lincoln Douglas debates. These are mini-essays. Can you imagine Bush or Gore lecturing 15 miuntes on any topic? OK, well, Bush then, since Gore is currently in a documentary talking about global warming (and he pulls every trick he can to keep what he says interesting). Lincoln and Douglas barnstormed throughout Illinois (recall this was a senatorial race, not the Presidential race, and Lincoln lost).

Political handlers would tell these politicians not to think too deeply because Americans aren't patient enough nor bright enough to figure out elaborate arguments, no matter how impassioned the speakers are.

Go ahead, do a search for Lincoln-Douglas. Try this site. It's not even that hard to read, but you can hardly imagine a discussion like this.