All of the books in the world contain no more information than is broadcast as video in a single large American city in a single year. Not all bits have equal value.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It's a fact that more people watch television and get their information that way than read books. I find new technology and new ways of communication very exciting and would like to do more in this field.
Remember: TV is a format, film is a format, and books are a format.
We see ourselves as the world's digital library. That can be a lot more than books. We do want to expand to other types of content: sheet music, magazines, user-generated content.
Video just accesses international information so much more readily.
Human attention is limited, and a massive number of newly browsable books from the long tail necessarily compete with the biggest best-sellers, just as cable siphons audience from the major networks, and just as the Web pulls viewers from TV.
Television and film are our libraries now. Our history books.
As useful as websites and journals are, there's real value in books, too.
You really can create a lot of value by putting content and distribution together, particularly if the content is cable content.
The internet creates more of an appetite for media - it doesn't replace physical books, radio or TV.
Books are a finer world within the world.
No opposing quotes found.