The Decline of Reading and the Dangers of TL:DR Culture

TL:DR (too long, didn’t read) is very quickly becoming the slogan of the times. No-one seems to have the time or patience to actually read anything anymore and even video needs to be short enough to hold our attention, evidenced by the massive popularity of TikTok, and the rise of the YouTube shorts format (I actually heard one of the hosts on a video that my son was watching give his viewers the TL:DR summary of his own videos, a move that seems rather counter-intuitive).

We like to disparage the goldfish, claiming (incorrectly it turns out) that they have an attention span of only nine seconds, but research has shown that the average human has an attention span of only 8.25 seconds – 4.25 seconds less than in 2000. Add to that the increasing decline in the ability to read for meaning and the overall habit of reading, or not reading, in general and we’ve got a serious problem.

Imagine what is lost to the world when we are simply seeing a summary!

Think of literature for example:

War and Peace: Russia, snow, aristocracy, philosophy, lots of difficult names, very long.

Ulysses: Ireland, day-in-the-life, drinking, nod to Homer, humour, confusing.

The Infinite Jest: Tennis, addiction, wheelchair assassins, lots of endnotes and footnotes, feels like the author might have been ‘trolling you’.

Or movies:

The Usual Suspects: Criminals, drugs, police investigations, plot twist, Keyser Söze.

Se7en: Murders, biblical references, rookie detective, bad punchlines, “what’s in the box?”.

2001: A Space Odyssey: Monkeys, monoliths, space travel, classical music, bad robot.

These examples are obviously somewhat facetious but the fact that people are no longer taking the time to read, and that many of those who do are unable to read for meaning, can have real world implications.

We need look no further than much of the health reporting, which, apart from the problem of many journalists and headline writers not knowing enough about the subject matter (the juniorisation of the newsroom is perhaps a topic for a future column…), very often leads to people seeing a headline and jumping to conclusions about the rest.

One example of this was the widely reported study which revealed that processed meats like ham, salami or bacon could cause cancer. In all the articles I found the vital information – that the study was conducted on mice and that there was no evidence that it would have the same effect on humans – was clearly communicated, but nonetheless there was widespread panic about how we all needed to cut processed meats from our diets.

More recently there was the Aspartame study where the World Health Organisation said the artificial sweetener was “possibly carcinogenic to humans”. The WHO, and almost all of the articles I read, also pointed out that they were not recommending that people cut the sweetener out of their diet, nor were they even changing their guidelines for the “Acceptable Daily Intake”. In fact, they went as far as to point out that in order to surpass the ADI one would need to consume in excess of 14 cans of diet soda a day. Still, panic ensued.

Or, in a local example, social media was ignited by news that the government was pushing to allow visa-free access to Chinese nationals, with many lamenting the influx of Chinese people to Namibia that this would cause. Some members of opposition parties claimed that the move would exacerbate the country’s unemployment situation, inferring that by allowing visa-free access Namibian youth would further lose out on jobs. And in a frankly xenophobic statement, Popular Democratic Party leader McHenry Venaani claimed that the move would allow “Chinese prisoners … as well as delinquents of Chinese society to come and settle in Namibia”. The fact that the only change to the existing visa regime would be that Chinese travellers, rather than applying for a visa before leaving their country, would be able to receive a visa on arrival (as visitors from 55 other countries currently can), was lost on most. Nonetheless, panic.

While I concede that a certain amount of blame should go to the headline writers themselves, I can only imagine that much panic and fuss could be avoided if people just took the time to actually read the articles or statements rather than see a headline and simply assume the rest. So, if you have taken the time to read this far, thank you, and as always…

Until next month: enjoy your journey.