Y Can't Jonny Rite?

When I heard the promo for this show earlier this morning, I thought: "Who could possibly believe that the ability to write is becoming obsolete?" I wouldn't even consider hiring a person who can't express him/herself reasonably well verbally, and in writing. Since one of my businesses is on-line, I receive email messages regularly that can't be deciphered, are full of typos, and lack all punctuation. Surely, the people who write this junk must recognize the difficulty it imposes on those to whom it's directed. I don't want to listen to people who include nearly repetitious insertions of "like" and "you know" in their speech, and neither do I have the time or desire to attempt to figure out what people are trying to say. It's worth noting that many of my emails come from overseas, from people whose first language is NOT English. They often include an apology for their English, but it's usually much clearer than the communications I receive from Americans whose first language IS allegedly English.

I DO agree that being able to write is an essential skill. However, I do not believe that the chosen platforms for communication mentioned in the segment is to blame (Twitter and Facebook).

As someone who uses both, and maintains a blog, I enjoy writing, and am a proponent of language skills. However, I don't believe that being able to form complex sentences is the mark of a good writer. My blog posts tend to be long-form, but I have had to restrain myself and practice economy with my writing when posting to Twitter or Facebook.

I feel that being able to convey my thoughts in 140 characters requires me to carefully choose my words for the maximum impact. Relying on meandering sentences to make a point, or to use as a benchmark for who is or is not a "good writer" is wrong-headed, in my opinion. Instead, one should look at the _quality_ of the writing, and whether or not the point was conveyed to the satisfaction of the author.

Virginia Prescott's interview with Stanley Fish about writing in college reveals that Fish understands too little about how his students learn to write. The topic is important, but the issues Fish raises aren't relevant. As Prescott made clear through her questions, Fish isn't familiar with the research on this topic. His own investigation, which involved, in part, helicoptering in on some of his grad students' classes, isn't the kind of rigor we would expect from Fish. Learning to write well is a lifelong, non-linear journey that involves many different experiences, opportunities, audiences, occasions, media . . . and courses. Pointing to one course and calling for a return to the good old days sounds like a driveby solution to a made-up problem. Word of Mouth's questions for Fish, background work and web links provide the depth needed to better understand both why this topic is important and why Fish is really, well, just fishing.