In my own feeling, video reading has a natural bug, that is, the information density and retrieval efficiency are relatively low.
Usually, a person’s normal speech speed is almost 200~300 words/minute, but the average person can easily reach 500~1000 words/minute reading speed after simple training. A half-hour-long video, depending on the speed of speech, is usually paired with a text of about 8,000 to 10,000 words. But according to my reading speed, I can finish reading the text only in 10 minutes at most.
In addition, when a public number such as “One Seat” pushes out a speech, it is usually followed by the text of the video. For a 15-minute speech, I can finish watching the transcript in about 5 minutes, so I gradually stopped watching their video speeches.
Also, one of the advantages of reading the transcript is that you can quickly determine a reading strategy. For example, if I want to read an article in a field I’m familiar with, I just need to skim the framework and order of the article, then skip the basic background knowledge and read only the parts I need in the middle. In this way, an article of tens of thousands of words would actually take only ten minutes to read. But with video, there’s no way I can frame a two- or three-hour video and then determine which parts are useful and which parts need to be read closely.
In addition, another major problem with video “reading” is that the order of reading follows the time. As mentioned above, when reading the book, I can skip the parts I am familiar with, and I can spend more time reading the parts I am not familiar with several times, but when this part of the video is over, it is also directly over. Of course, if the content of non-live, you can indeed pull back, and then repeatedly watch, but after all, this is not directly read the text to the convenience – not to mention the text when you can also write and draw to mark the key.
Of course, this is not to say that the video is useless. For example, when watching some military science programs, with animation can be very intuitive to show the working principle of certain weapons, many non-professional people can also understand at a glance. For example, some dance moves, martial arts moves, follow the video to learn both less prone to error, and also high efficiency. A few seconds in the video can be finished, with text may require hundreds or even thousands of words, so the final description is not necessarily accurate. I prefer to read the main part of the text, but when it comes to some text is difficult to explain or describe the problem, insert a video or picture to help tell.
The above-mentioned is only the problem of information density. In the context of human beings still using language as the main means of communication, a lot of abstract content is difficult to be expressed through figurative images, and in any human discipline, standardized research is necessarily based on a large number of professional academic concepts and abstract research methods, which determines that, at least for the time being, video is indeed unable to express a lot of more “advanced “advanced” content. Moreover, even if video could “express” such content in some way, it would not be efficient for professional learners – at 20,000 words per hour of uninterrupted reading, a 500,000-word monograph would take an entire day to read. But for many professional researchers, a 500,000-word monograph can be read in half a day at most.
If we have to increase the density of information in the video, the only feasible way is to make each segment of the video carry more information. But then, the viewer would have to spend more energy to pause the picture and think before going to the next part. Or, by repeatedly watching the way to understand the content of the video. This way down, the audience has spent much more time than the text reading.
At present, the real problem of many video programs is that there is too much invalid information in the video. This invalid information, reflected in two aspects: first, is that many video information and the text content of the correlation itself is weak, such as some talk about the history of the UP master when talking about the war, will randomly cut some movies, TV series war scenes to fill; second, is that many people do not have any information in the video content itself, but will cause strong interference in the reading process, such as a bunch of half Buddha video The motion picture – this often makes people think “this video is really interesting”, but in fact, when watching the video attention is mostly attracted away by the picture, the real content is what to remember not many people.
Even those well-produced programs are often filled with a lot of invalid information. Like our professional classes and internships in television, when it comes to program filming, teachers and those old cameras teach the most of a skill is nothing to shoot more empty shots, editing when you do not know what to cut properly put two empty shots as a transition. The “empty mirror” is actually invalid information, but in the video production and essential, so that the video in the end how much water mixed, it is not difficult to imagine.
PS.
Finally, regarding the information density of voice and text, I can give a visual example.
Among the people reading this answer, there should be many who like to read online, right?
If the normal reading speed is 250 words per minute, then the number of words read aloud per hour is 15,000 words – and at the current length of 3,000 words per chapter, 15,000 words is only 5 chapters. So, when you read online, does it take you an hour to read 5 chapters?
@AutisticGirlFermiami: You look up the information, watch a 5 minutes and 15 seconds video of a blogger talking to the camera all the time, interspersed with emojis and stalker pictures, and finally realize that life was wasted for 5 minutes.
You see that the video’s comments have a class representative summary, grateful for the tears of gratitude do not know what to say drops of grace when the spring to repay.
You can easily come across a whole video without nonsense all dry, turn around to find one of the key points, but back and forth to pull the progress bar three or four times can not find.
How many of these crashes you have, how much more likely to protect our text from being replaced.
Master Yunzhong:Today is said to be World Book Day, so I can talk a little bit about my worries about the current young generation not reading. My experience of teaching in China over the past ten years is that I have found that young people today are actually reading less and less, if at all. In addition to teaching, almost every year I attend many graduate school admissions interviews, not just in history, but also in various fields of humanities and social sciences. Those who attend these interviews should be the best tier of higher education in China, ranking probably in the top twenty percent of each school or even higher. But one of the most common characteristics is that the vast majority of these students have probably not even read a single in-depth academic book during their college years, and what is even more frightening is that it is often in their chosen field of study. The most fatal problem is that it is extremely common, and increasingly common, for a student to fail to summarize in a minute or two the basic ideas and content of an important scholarly work that has influenced him/her, despite the fact that these students often do well in all their classes. In fact such students seem to me to be semi-literate. The biggest problem now is not that reading is fragmented by the Internet, etc., but that they don’t read at all. In the future, World Book Day may really become the only day in the world to read.
Recent Comments