Skip to main content

Another thought about the history of journalism

 



I wrote last week about the history of journalism, and its technologies, prior to the introduction of the World Wide Web.  

In this connection I have come across a fascinating quote from Ben Bagdikian, who was following precisely this subject in real time. In a 1973 article for the Columbia Journalism Review, Bagdikian wrote about the new doohickies on which reporters were writing their stories in the most advanced city rooms. His breathless prose is amusing from this distance. 

I call them "dookickies" because the names were in flux. The phrase "word processor" would eventually stick for machines dedicated to textual purposes such as reporters and editors would employ. Further on, of course, it became the name of a class of computer software, but that was distant yet. Again, the following passage comes from 1973. 

As he types, the letters appear on the screen. If he wishes to delete or add to a line he has typed, he uses a set of command keys to move a cursor -- a bright oblong of light -- over the place he wishes to alter, types in the change, and the screen shows these and automatically makes room for the additions or closes up deletions.

Wow. I love the tone of an anthropologist reporting on the habits of a newly discovered tribe in the thickest forests of New Guinea. And I'd also like to know how I can modify my system to give myself an oblong cursor.

An "oblong," by the way, is a racetrack shape somewhere between an oval and a rectangle. You see an example above.

Comments

  1. Delightful! In 1973, I had not a clue of any of this. I suspect I was not alone in that ignorance. Much later (I was in my fifties), I could not have made a living, doing what I did, had I resisted learning what everyone else was learning. My employer, having continuously updated job descriptions, made certain employees would have no choice but to fall in line with progress, if they expected to pursue careers.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak