Clive Thompson Summary

Clive Thompson, the author of “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy”, suggests that technology has helped the younger generation. Andrea Lunsford, a writing and rhetoric professor at Stanford University, is mentioned and believes that “…technology isn’t killing our ability to write. It’s reviving it”. She discovered that this young generation is writing much more than any other in the past. Examples of this were Twitter, blogs, and texting. Thompson claims that the current world of online writing is the closest to Greek tradition of writing and arguing. He concludes that “today’s young people” are aware of writing’s key element: knowing why you are writing and who you are writing for. Although Thompson does not say so directly, he assumes that all teenagers excel in writing because of the forms of writing they use. My own view is that the level of eloquence depends on the person. Though I concede that it is nice to read something positive about technology and having someone praise teenagers for once is different, I still maintain that teenagers and their writing abilities should not be stereotyped, whether positive or negative. For example, I text message as if I am writing an essay. I use punctuation marks, start my sentences with a capitalized letter and spell words the way they should be spelled. Although some might object that text messages were created for short messages, I reply that I know plenty of people that text message the same way I do. The reason I do it is because I fear that it will affect my essay writing. The issue is important because there are so many current views on how technology is making children illiterate and this article contradicts that idea. Because of the shortening of messaging in online chatting and text messaging, most people assume that students will start to incorporate that into all of their writing; essays and short answers will become indecipherable. With the help of Lunsford, Thompson is able to show evidence that the stereotype is not true and calls it “another myth”. Lunsford continues to support students by praising their skill of kairos which consists of “adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across”. She also believes that writing consists of organizing, debating and persuading for students. One implication of Thompson’s treatment of the media “pushing literacy into cool directions” is that the media is already such a controversial topic. There are multiple texts out there bashing the media for ruining society but here Thompson is, encouraging online media to continue its course. I believe that when he mentions online media, he needs to be more specific before opponents start to attack his view. Social networking sites like Twitter allow messages of 140 characters each. This means that one has to be able to get their point across in 140 characters or less. This could be positive in the sense that it will be more concise but on the other hand, this would be where the “texting speak” that Lunsford mentions would appear. I was initially surprised at the evidence that Lunsford had given in support of Thompson’s argument but after reading the text, I agree with them both. Hopefully other people will start to change their mindsets and give technology the benefit of the doubt when it comes to literacy.