What is Digg?46 Comments
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Being literate is the ability to read. Being "alliterate" is having the ability to read and simply choosing not to. I think the second word, in regards non-trivial content, fits Americans more than the first term.
- Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Literate != reads books.
- jackhole, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13"Functionally illiterate" does not mean what you think it means.
- mickeyknoxxx, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9How is this for a stat?
The average magazine in the U.S. is written at a 5th grade comprehension level.
But than again, who needs books when you've got the internet? Everyone knows if it's said on the internet it's true. (/s) - merlingen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7readened
- atdigg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6English is not my first language, what's the past tense of "read"?
- Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Yeah, like I got buried for saying: being literate does not mean reading books. It means being able to read. For instance, Digg.
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8This is what happens when schools are more worried about making sure students FEEL good about their "Learning Experience" than actually teaching.
- Liam76, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9That source is BS. Jenkins groups is a selff promoting publishing group, not some sort of recognized polling group.
- bitcloud, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Being literate in the modern world means more than being able to read signs and burger menus...
- Enfenestrate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I've read a couple of e-books before, it kinda sucks. Give me a paperback any day.
- bitcloud, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3have you ever tried to read an e-book?
- Enfenestrate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Right. Not reading does not make you functionally illiterate, it just means that you don't read. As long as you can read well enough to do what you need to do (fill out job applications, that sort of thing) you are NOT functionally illiterate.
Functionally illiterate means that your reading ability is so low that it actually hurts your ability to function in society. - wageslaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@doctorsax
The value in having a laudable vocabulary is being able to clearly express yourself. Having an expanded vocabulary means little by itself, the true value is in the freedom and accuracy it gives your self expression.
Being functionally literate -- arming yourself with a capable vocabulary and to be experienced in the world of ideas -- provides the tools to understand the subtle nuances of the world.
Having a good vocabulary (and being functionally literate) isnt a parlour trick to impress your friends. It is about having a fit mind, as a long-distance runner has a fit body. - Darkhacker, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Maybe this is why Americans are so stupid and government is so ***** up? If you do not learn from history you are bound to repeat. I think all government officials should be required to take a basic intelligence test about US History, Math, Reading and other subjects to verify they aren't complete morons. And for the record, I still read books all the time.
- explnx, on 04/27/2009, -0/+2In the present tense is is pronounced "reed".
In the past tense it is pronounced "red".
It is spelled "read" in both cases, but in this context "has read (pronounced "red)" would be correct. - explnx, on 04/27/2009, -0/+2Am I misunderstanding "functionally illiterate"? I've never seen any adult who went through high school and couldn't read signs, price tags, etc. Books, while enlightening and entertaining, are not needed to function.
- wageslaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@lukesad
Yes, you are misunderstanding "functionally illiterate". Your describing a plainly "literate" person. Can she read? If yes, then she is literate. A functionally illiterate person is someone who can read, but does not. Leaving her no better than someone who is illiterate. Or, as the popular proverb says "Those who do not read are no better off than those who cannot read.".
"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn."
-- William Shakespeare - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@mickeyknoxx
I think the same goes for newspapers as well..and music for that matter. Every form of media in this country has been dumbed down to appeal to a wider, less educated demographic. My favorite group (Little Brother) has had their records and videos rejected from TV and radio because the program directors deemed them "too smart for their average viewer/listener". Silly *****, but true. - bitcloud, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You need to be able to read a ballot to function...
- blqysmg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I know we are unusual, but my family buys at least twenty books a year. We read more than that, because we borrow books from the local library and other family members. Most of my family has a serious reading habit, as does my wife's family.
Of course, we're teaching our kids to love books, too. I have been reading less from a "dead tree" book in the last couple of years than I had in the past. The internet, eBooks, and audio books have taken place of ink on paper for a lot of my reading. I'll bet many of the people who have abandoned traditional books have also gone that route. If anything, the Internet has expanded the amount of reading Americans are doing, not the other way around. - arousingwedgie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I thought "alliterate" had something to do with matching consonant sounds.
- wageslaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Are you suggesting that the abysmal "books-read-per-year" statistics, when compared to other nations, is because USofAmericans choose ebooks/audio/internet-books as an alternative?
Those alternative formats for books are available in all the other nations that are reported to be avid readers (where your reading habits are more normal). - InfamousAtheist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2The source is without doubt biased... but I tend to agree that most Americans don't read much, and many who do read trite material that does little to expand their minds. Just check out some of the garbage on the NYT Best Sellers list... I'm sorry but James Patterson, Mary Higgins Clark, and Dean Koontz pump out ***** that any third grader should be able to read, and the masses eat that garbage up.
I'm not saying I've never read a novel that was easy to read, but I enjoy material that provokes thought and demands higher levels of comprehension, whether it's fiction or not. - wageslaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1UNESCO can give you the same data. An American Publisher may be motivated by self-interest to promote this fact, but it is certainly true.
- Anrkist, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3It's not even that some of us choose not to... but some of us just don't have the time. Reading is not a luxury everyone can afford.
- wageslaven, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2No. This is what happens when a culture becomes when it becomes anti-intellectual. A culture that makes trivial entertainment laudable. A culture that chooses to pollute its public discourse with meaninglessness.
America doesnt challenge itself to think about important things, instead, it chooses to exault the ever more pointless.
As a counter point, did you know that the French read more books every year than anyone else on the planet? I believe that the rank-and-file knee-jerk anti-france sentiment is precisly because this. This difference in literacy is one of the reasons, IMHO.
I suspect, the first reaction to the above statement on the part of a USofAmerican will be "France isnt better than America because it reads more books" combined with a tinge of "No wonder the French think they are so smart, they read more than Americans, that is what makes them so ZXY" and summarily bury this comment.
I offer this conditioned anti-intellectual response as evidence to my point. - asancho, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Now that "Let me buy you a Drank" is one of the top songs in the country, most people chose to re-elect bush, and more news networks chose to focus on Paris Hilton going to jail rather than the Democratic debates, im beginning to think that most Americans are also functionally retarded....
- atdigg, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10He's a moron no matter how many books he read.
- wageslaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Angriest
"Reading is not a luxury everyone can afford"
For every person who truly cannot afford the time to read, but wished she did, I'll show you 1000 Americans who find time for American Idol.
I appreciate what your saying -- and there are surely people in the sad situation you describe (maybe you?) -- but we are talking general social conditions here, providing a small group of counter examples doest disprove the story's point: Americans are functionally illiterate because they choose to be. - merlingen, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2If only I read books like Harry Potter and Teach Yourself Visual C#.NET in 24 Hours! Then my critical thinking skill wouldn't be so impaired!
- fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2@atdigg
Read is the past tense. Reading is the present tense. - cyberdork, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2ADHD?
- Enfenestrate, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Functionally illiterate means that the person can read, but just barely. The person is able to read, and therefore not truly illiterate, but struggles to perform basic functions that involve reading. The person's ability to function with basic tasks is such that he might as well be illiterate.
- thepeacemaker, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2I can't remember the last time I read a book cover to cover. Most people probably don't have the patience for it or find reading books, especially fictional ones, no different than watching movies because I think its just a different form of entertainment. However I have a feeling that most people like myself these days are more into reading magazine and online articles - short, informative, and to the point.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1No methodology for the statistics, no digg.
The source of the statistics has a crappy, annoying website with little information about the "Jenkins Group, inc" other than they are publishers. Where did THEY get the statistics? - chopenik, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Sad but true.
- ripstuntz, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Who reads books anymore when we can do the same thing for free (most of the time) on our computers....
- saigumi, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2*BREAKING NEWS* 99.999% of American Families did not purchase a buggy whip this year!
Save the buggy whip industry, buy a whip! (And a buggy for that matter)
Oddly enough, I'm trying to think of the last book I've bought. I can think of the books on cd, eBooks, magazines, board game manuals, and all that rigamarole, but a dead tree "book" book... it has been a long while. - cankillar, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3"He's a moron no matter how many books he read."
...read? That's wrong in both tenses, past and present.
Maybe you should go read a book. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4I wonder where George Bush fits into those stats?
- Xeth, on 10/11/2007, -15/+7Liberty, ***** YEAH!
White Slips, ***** YEAH!
The Alamo, ***** YEAH!
Band-aids, ***** YEAH!
Las Vegas, ***** YEAH!
Christmas, ***** YEAH!
Immigrants, ***** YEAH!
Popeye, ***** YEAH!
Democrats, ***** YEAH!
Republicans (republicans)
(***** yeah, ***** yeah)
Sportsmanship
Books...?
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is