From: Linda TerHaar <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 00:20:31 -0500 Systematic surveying would indeed be interesting and informative with carefully construed definitions. Had Provost O'Donnell been a fellow passenger my cross-country flight yesterday, he would have seen at least one head-phoned passenger knitting. Most likely I would not have been included in his observations. Was I reading? Yes, by at least some broad definitions. Reading an audiobook. On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:32:44 -0500, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > From: "James J. O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:30:04 -0500 > > With thanks for comments on my last update. To Laval H., I observed > only that I did not count "chatting" as an activity because the Amtrak > "Quiet Car," civilization's last bulwark against a world of cell > yellers, would skew the numbers. > > On a cross-country flight yesterday, I happened to notice that my row > of seats had six tablet computers, so I got up to do a count of about > 150 seats, from which: > > 30 were reading print; > 11 were reading e-readers (dedicated Kindle/Nook or iPad that I could > see was being read for text), > 16 were using an electronic device for other purposes (mainly laptops > but also video on a tablet) > > There was some chatting and a lot of napping, lolling, and staring. > My *mild* observation is that I had imagined the e-/print reading > ratio would have been higher, given that long-haul trains and planes > are populated by people with *some* disposable cash and with an > interest in diverting themselves effectively, and for all that we hear > of sales, the numbers are still modest. I repeat my observation, > though, that the tablet/laptop/phone provides other resources for > distraction besides "reading". > > I'm well aware there is no statistical significance to these > observations: systematic surveying would be interesting. > > Jim O'Donnell > Georgetown