What is literacy?

It’s time for new definitions of literacy just as we need new definitions of media.

I’ve been talking with lots of people lately – academics, foundation and government folks – about the need for more media literacy training today as media is becoming more expansive and thus confusing.

But I emphasize that media literacy today must encompass not just the consumption but the creation of media. Media literacy means being able to find and discriminate among sources of information and being able to create content and understand how it fits into the larger sphere of information and identity.

But now break media literacy down into its component definitions. What does literacy itself mean today: reading, finding, discriminating, what else?

An annual survey of literacy out of Central Connecticut State University frets that declining newspaper readership is a sign of reduced literacy. No surprise: I’ll argue with that.

Jack Miller, author of the survey, says: “This study attempts to capture one critical index of our nation’s well-being — the literacy of its major cities–by focusing on six key indicators of literacy: newspaper circulation, number of bookstores, library resources, periodical publishing resources, educational attainment, and Internet resources.” But, of course, the last of those has an impact on and even redefines all the other indicators.

And the problem is that even in its definition of the internet, the study still relies on views of media in pre-internet terms: “1. Number of Internet book orders per capita; 2. Number of unique visitors per capita to a city’s internet version newspaper; 3. Number of webpage views per capita to a city’s internet version newspaper.” What about reading – and interacting with and creating – new media not related to the old?

I don’t want to mischaracterize Miller’s work. He is trying to connect various activities associated with literacy. The story about his survey says:

That concern was that declining newspaper readership was caused by increasing online newspaper readers. This was the same assumption that having a book available online meant fewer local booksellers and less use of libraries.

However, what Miller found was just the opposite.

Examining the data for this and his past surveys, Miller found that top ranking cities for library use also have more booksellers, and that cities with more booksellers also have more people buying books online, and that cities with higher per capita newspaper circulation rates also had a higher proportion of people reading newspapers online.

“Cities that rank highly in one form of literate behavior are likely to rank highly in the other forms and practices of literacy,” Miller said.

He noted that a literate society tends to practice many forms of literacy not just one or another.

Good. But we still need to redefine literacy – as we also understand that the internet is not a medium. To quote Doc Searls, the internet is a place. It’s a means of making connections and creating. I went around this track a few times with Howard Weaver in a different discussion. He said that “the internet is NOT a source of news; it’s a delivery system.” I argued that the internet is not just a means of delivery for one-way distribution of media as a product; the internet is a means of collaboration, creation, and curation (alliteration unintentional). Paper is a medium; the internet is not. Jay Rosen also pointed to the problem of trying to view these overlapping structures as if they were separate when he tweeted regarding Pew’s latest: “‘Net Overtakes Newspapers As News Source’ is a weird headline because newspapers are the main ‘source’ of the Net’s news.” (For now, I’ll add.) And what’s a newspaper when a newspaper goes online? 140 characters later, Jay added: “People had organized their media headsets like so: print, radio, TV, now Internet! Re-organizing is so painful they’d rather not make sense.” The dictionary’s behind, too: “Media – the main means of mass communication (esp. television, radio, newspapers, and the Internet).” Except it’s not just mass now and it’s not just communication and the internet isn’t a medium; other than that….

So back to the start: We must redefine media as we redefine literacy.

Media is no longer broken into separate means of presentation and delivery; they are all mixed in together online (as I tell journalism students, while hacks in my era had to decide among media once for a career, now they must make that decision each time they go to gather and tell a story). The internet, as a replacement for media, brings in so much more functionality: the ability to search, create, analyze, curate, track, interact, follow….

Media literacy, then, must embrace all those activities and skills, not just reading but:
* knowing how to focus on a need for information and express that by crafting a query to find an answer;
* knowing how to judge the relevance and reliability of sources – including the PageRank-like skill of judging sources on sources;
* knowing how to create (and remix) content across all media types;
* knowing how to collaborate;
* understanding the impact of facts on perspective and perspective on opinion;
* understanding the impact of identity and anonymity;
* understanding the relationship of pieces of information that make up a larger story via links;
* understanding how to make and find corrections…

And on and on. There’s a lot of good thinking on the topic: Here’s Dan Gillmor’s list of principles of media literacy. Howard Schneider is running a Knight-backed curriculum in news literacy at Stony Brook; here’s a list of Schneider’s key skills. Here’s an article on Ofcom’s efforts in media literacy in the UK, which says: “A media literate person can access, understand and create communications in a variety of contexts.”

I’d like to see more discussion of new definitions of media, literacy, and media literacy. What do you think? What are the new definitions and new skills?

  • http://twitter.com/moon paul

    Literacy has to go beyond just reading, on the web we have photos and video to tell the story

  • http://www.subhub.com Evan Rudowski

    Jeff,

    It is good to see you giving credit to Howard Schneider and some of his work. I had the opportunity to work with Howie at Newsday in the early 1990s when he was one of the first in the newsroom to recognize the power of new media and to take steps to facilitate its development. It was a great opportunity and privilege for me as a relatively young new media person to work alongside Howie and some of the journalists around him who soon became friends and mentors to me — and it was tremendously validating to have someone of Howie’s stature begin to acknowledge the impact that new media would have. I’m glad his voice is still being heard.

    Kind regards,
    Evan Rudowski

  • barbara raab

    “Media is no longer broken into separate means of presentation and delivery; they are all mixed in together online (as I tell journalism students, while hacks in my era had to decide among media once for a career, now they must make that decision each time they go to gather and tell a story).”

    –this, in a nutshell, is the “elevator speech” for so-called convergence in J-Schools, IMHO.

  • http://www.patrickyen.com Patrick Yen

    Here’s my take..

    The elements of composition, in my opinion,
    are surprisingly universal through various media.

    Placement, balance, subtraction, highlighting, etc.

    Traditionally people have been educated to learn the elements of composition as they apply to one specific medium – just writing or just painting for example.

    Before teaching specialization in one medium, I would like to see more educators provide a more generalized, holistic approach as to how the elements of composition are relevant throughout various media.

    Good music tells a story, good writing tells a story,
    good paintings tell a story, et cetera.

    They accomplish this by evoking mood and feeling,
    eliciting a response from the viewer.

    Whether you’re composing with words, or photos, or paint,
    or sounds – is ultimately irrelevant in my opinion.

    It’s not how you communicate,
    but what you communicate that ultimately matters.

    Certain media have their own advantages and disadvantages. A classical composition by Beethoven is virtually universal to a global audience, without needing to be translated like words. Conflict photography that connects to viewers through universal themes of human struggle doesn’t necessarily need to be translated into different languages in much the same way that words need to be – to be understood.

  • http://www.netgenpr.com Mike Elliott

    In the most general sense I would define new media literacy as follows:

    “A synthesis of language, thinking and contextual practices through which meaning is shaped. ‘Effective literacy is intrinsically purposeful, flexible and dynamic’ (Dawkins, J, 1991, Australia’s Language: The Australian Literacy and Language Policy, AGPS) and involves interactions in a range of modes and through a variety of mediums.” ref: http://bit.ly/igYe

    Working from this definition the greatest challenge to literacy on the Web is taking what appears to most as an overwhelming labyrinth of information and structuring an approach to discerning what is relevant to us at any given time. So being able to dig through this noise to locate and make sense of information is to me the core skill set needed for new media literacy or at least the starting point. More specifically the new media literate person should be able to:

    1. Define the platforms for information distribution and exchange (distribution & exchange architecture) – in other words where to find information besides Google.
    2. Be able to structure meaningful, context based search queries and filtering protocols (search & filtering architecture).
    3. Understand the difference between human and non-human filtering mechanisms (i.e. search algorithms vs. influencers and thought leaders).
    4. Understand how to intelligently combine human and non-human filtering mechanisms to increase contextual relevancy of information.
    5. Be able to construct an efficient filtering architecture that reduces noise, irrelevant data non-authoritative data, and non-factual data (i.e. RSS readers, social bookmarking, social network searching, etc.).

    I know this scratches the surface of the question. However without basic skills in these areas you run the risk of being overwhelmed with irrelevant data.

  • Pingback: links for 2008-12-27 | The Computer Vet Weblog

  • Pingback: Beneath the Peak » » Media Literacy

  • Eretz

    “We must redefine media as we redefine literacy”

    ::::::

    Nonsense. (literal)

    You are really advocating mere logical thinking & clear communication.

    Yes, those are scarce commodities these days.

    But that scarcity is caused by our disastrous American public school system — not ‘definitions’.

  • Andy Freeman

    > I argued that the internet is not just a means of delivery for one-way distribution of media as a product; the internet is a means of collaboration, creation, and curation (alliteration unintentional). Paper is a medium; the internet is not.

    The fact that one collaborates, creates, and curates differently over the internet than one does with paper does not imply that the internet is not a medium. (In fact, it’s wrong to suggest that there’s only one way to collaborate, create, and curate with paper. How one does those things depends on the available printing technologies, distribution systems, and even the economic structures.)

  • Pingback: Links for January 6th | byJoeyBaker

  • Pingback: O que é a literacia? « Synergias

  • http://www.a1z3.com ahmedzake

    “Media is no longer broken into separate means of presentation and delivery; they are all mixed in together online (as I tell journalism students, while hacks in my era had to decide among media once for a career, now they must make that decision each time they go to gather and tell a story).”

  • ranteallo tirsa

    literacy is the ability to read and write. It means reading is bringing meaning to get meaning from printed or written material.