Magazines: Digital or Pulp?
An interesting observation: For years I subscribed to the New Yorker but finally gave it up because of the 'guilty pile' that grew larger and larger each month. I managed to read an article or so (and the film/book reviews and cartoons) but that was about it. Some issues went unread. It doesn't help that I habitually subscribe to between 6-7 magazines simultaneously. Other magazines that I have subscribed to over the years: Wired, Smithsonian, The Atlantic, PC World, Utne, Harvard Educational Review, Harpers, Rolling Stone and more.
Enter tablets into my life. I have now subscribed to The New Yorker again digitally. I have also subscribed to The Wired via the iPad Newsstand. Each week (or month) the magazines simply appear on the iPad. What I am finding the most interesting is that I am reading MOST of the issues "cover to cover". It seems reading one screen at a time gets one to the end of an article quickly. I like this one-thing-at-a-time aspect of digital devices. The limited screen size helps preserve focus by narrowing what is viewable. (My first e-book was Howard Gardner’s book Five Minds for the Future which I read on an iPod Touch. Lots of “page” turns but there was something refreshing about reading with as large a font as I desired.)
Interestingly, however, I prefer to read Rolling Stone as an in-hand magazine. Cover to cover. It wouldn't work on the Kindle somehow. So, I can't definitively say I prefer e-reading to pulp. It depends on content and context. Come to think of it that sums up nearly everything. When it comes down to it the most honest (and thoughtful) answer to most “what-do-you-prefer” questions is, “It depends”.