<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/">
<title>Pew Internet and American Life Project: Commentaries</title>

<link>http://www.pewinternet.org/pipcomments.asp</link>

<description>The Pew Internet and American Life Project aims to be an authoritative source for timely information on the Internet's growth and societal impact, through research that is scrupulously impartial.</description>

<language>en-us</language>

<webMaster>webmaster@pewinternet.org</webMaster>

<items>

<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1474/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1473/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1472/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1471/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1470/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1469/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1468/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1467/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1466/pipcomments.asp" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1465/pipcomments.asp" />
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1474/pipcomments.asp">
<title>China's Earthquake on TV and on the Internet</title>
<description><![CDATA[On Monday, May 12, at 2:28 pm, I was working at my desk on the 21st floor of the apartment building where we live in Beijing.  
<P>
(Read on for an account of how blogs, Twitter, and Google provided news coverage in China this week.)]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Monday, May 12, at 2:28 pm, I was working at my desk on the 21st floor of the apartment building where we live in Beijing.  Like many other people at that moment, I suddenly felt dizzy and lightheaded. I gripped the edge of my desk, wondering if I might faint. Then the curtain pulls began to sway, and the walls began to creak. After years of living through earthquakes in Japan, I recognized the signs. After a minute or so it was over. 
<P>
Within about 15 minutes, my search for "earthquake China" on Google was producing results. Reuters showed up first, reporting a website announcement from the U.S. Geological Survey that there had been an earthquake in Sichuan Province, about 1000 miles southwest of Beijing. One of China's most popular English blogs, Danwei.org, weighed in at 2:47 pm, with a short report and including a link to Twitter, which was beginning to come alive with comments and messages from all over China.  There was nothing on the TV, and there wouldn't be for about four more hours. 
<P>
I have been tracking the earthquake story on TV and on the internet for over four days now, and here are some of the things I saw:
<P>
<B>Day One:</B>  Chinese TV has little more than a few fact-based reports about the earthquake. Mostly, it's business as usual. The internet is exploding with news and information and also with reporting and personal comments in the hyperactive Chinese blogosphere, Twitter, and all the instant messaging services in China.
 <P>
<B>Day Two:</B> The TV has a few reporters on the streets doing spot reporting and interviews from as far into the earthquake areas as they can reach, which is not very far. There is some footage of organized response teams, the arrival of Prime Minister Wen Jiabao in Sichuan, and scenes of devastation. The internet is getting organized, with collections of amateur videos, photography, and trading information on whereabouts of people in the earthquake area who can be useful to each other.
<P>
<B>Day Three:</B> TV pieces become more heavily produced, and they begin to include solemn background music, as well as announcements posted in black and white coloring. Talk shows emerge with experts and officials. There are personal interviews with survivors, and newscasters occasionally struggle to keep composure. The internet gets out information on donations as well as quacky theories on whether animal behavior can predict earthquakes. Everyone agrees that the government is moving forward with "unprecedented transparency" in media coverage.
<P>
<B>Day Four:</B> TV pieces take on distinct, strong tones of nationalistic pride. Flanks of soldiers in army fatigues run in formation through rubbled streets, clamber over landslides, portage boats, jump out of helicopters.  Medical staff in white uniforms; rescue squadrons in florescent orange; parades of ambulances. Legions more soldiers carry the injured piggy-back style or swaddle babies in their arms. There is footage of cranes, steam shovels, and people digging by hand through impossible mountains of debris. Also, there is seemingly no censorship on Chinese TV; the faces in all these productions tell everything. The soldiers are young; the grief is raw; the eyes are desperate. Chinese TV viewers are used to melodrama, but it's hard not to be overwhelmed by the scale and the personal toll. In one scene, a camera peers into a small crevice left between two collapsed floors of a building. You see the eyes and face of a young teen-age girl trapped there. You see she is waving her hand at the rescuers, and she calls out "I'm happy. I'm happy. Tell my mother not to worry!"  Online, the internet reports dig deeper into seismology; questions of building standards; comparative (non)reporting of past earthquakes; special sites for personal messages; pleas for news of missing people; more information about donations and charities.
<P>
This story will continue for a long, long time.</p><p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Deborah Fallows</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1473/pipcomments.asp">
<title>New communication technologies' impact on young adults</title>
<description><![CDATA[Our <i>Writing, Technology and Teens</i> report considered the impact of newer communication methods on young users. Do these effects carry over into a slightly older crowd?]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For my master's thesis at Georgetown University, I was interested in how 21st century communication technologies are changing the ways in which people interact with members of their social networks. Specifically, I focused my research on how Facebook is altering the methods users employ to build and maintain a network of friends. This research was facilitated by a survey of 644 Georgetown undergraduates on their uses of various communication technologies, and especially the internet, in keeping connected with others. 
<p>
I recently began thinking of my research in light of Pew's recent <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/247/report_display.asp"><i>Writing, Technology and Teens</i></a> report, and saw several interesting connections between the two. Both studies focus on digital natives, or those users who have had access to many of these newer communication technologies since a young age: Pew's report looks at 12-17 year olds, while my research was limited to college undergraduates ages 18-25. Furthermore, both studies consider the implications of technology on communication. Therefore, the question that arose in my mind was, do the trends we found in our Pew report among younger teens also apply to young adults?
<p>
In my survey, I asked respondents about the amount of time they spend on an average day using a variety of communication methods to keep in touch with friends, family and associates. A relationship between year in school and technology use quickly emerged, with upperclassmen being significantly more likely to spend more than one hour per day using "older" communication technologies such as the phone and email. Conversely, freshmen were twice as likely as upperclassmen to spend more than an hour each day on social networking sites to communicate and more than twice as likely to be spending that much time text messaging on an average day. See the chart below for a breakout of communication usage results from my survey across students' year in school.
<p> 
<img src="http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e335/jvitak/communicationmethodschart-1-1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket">
<p>
A number of possible conclusions could be drawn from these findings. Older students may be using formal communication methods more because they are looking beyond college and working on establishing a more professional online network and image. Younger students may be spending more time on newer technologies because they have, for all intents and purposes, grown up with them, and see these newer methods of communication as both quicker and easier ways of interacting. When Facebook launched in 2004, for example, current college seniors were just finishing up their high school years. Current college freshmen, however, had just begun high school; at this age, text-based gossip and IMing are a virtual institution. Consider, for example, Verizon's recent series of commercials centering on young teens and their text messaging habits. 
<p>
But what does this finding have to do with writing? The younger respondents in my survey tend to spend more time each day interacting with others via communication methods that encourage text shortcuts such as abbreviations, acronyms and emoticons. Therefore, these ways of typing -- being more ingrained in younger users' minds -- are probably more likely to bleed over into their more formal writing than among upperclassmen. In the college environment, however, these students are unlikely to find sympathy from their professors if such informal writing styles appear in their midterms and exams. Likewise, these students may have learned in high school about separating their formal and informal writing and do not allow the informal styles discussed in the Pew report to appear in their collegiate writing. 
<p> 
One of the most important things I have learned from my master's thesis research, and something I believe the <i>Writing</i> report echoes, is that we now stand at a turning point in communication technology. Longitudinal research should be conducted in future years to see if the results of these two studies are merely a reflection of a current fad or if the way we write and interact with the different types of people in our social networks is evolving.  
]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Jessica Vitak</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1472/pipcomments.asp">
<title>What is reading?</title>
<description><![CDATA[Our recent <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/247/report_display.asp">study</a> found there is a reciprocal relationship between different 
forms of media as electronic conventions seep, spring and even surge onto the printed page. The question then becomes what is writing? A parallel question is what does it mean to read text?]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In April the Pew Internet Project in conjunction with the <a </p><p>href="http://www.writingcommission.org/">National Commission on Writing</a> released <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/247/report_display.asp">Writing, Technology and Teens</a>. One </p><p>of the important points this study made is that there is a reciprocal relationship between different </p><p>forms of media as electronic conventions seep, spring and even surge onto the printed page. The </p><p>question then becomes what is writing? 
<P>
A parallel question is what does it mean to read text? A short history lesson reveals that the </p><p>definition has included:
<LI> the recitation of famous documents or poems,
<LI> being able to sound out words on a page,
<LI> the recognition of sight words,
<LI> the comprehension of novel text,
<LI> achieving fluency, and, more technically,
<LI> the ability to decode written language, etc. <BR>
(Pearson, 2001; Stahl & Miller, 1989; Wolf, 1988). </LI>
<P>
<P>
These different definitions serve to remind us that </p><p>the context is important. For example, as Wolf (1988) notes the historical context is important since </p><p>up until WWI and the introduction of technologies, knowing portions of the Gettysburg Address was </p><p>sufficient.
<P>
However, much of the concern about reading is more complex. It concerns genre (e.g., literary reading </p><p>vs. graphic novels), form (instruction manuals vs. email), duration (sustained vs. non-continuous), </p><p>purpose (e.g., functional vs. supplemental), motivation (e.g., voluntary vs. required) and medium </p><p>(print vs. electronic text). In application, this concern sometimes has the effect of adding a social </p><p>context when it values one type over another such as Austin before blogs.
<P>
Lastly, there are the outcome measures such as comprehension, retention or application in an authentic </p><p>activity that are central. That is, what is the effect of the text on the individual, what goal is </p><p>served, etc. And, as you may well ask, the goal of this post is to remind us that what it means to </p><p>read -- like what is means to write -- is complex. There just isn't a simple answer.
<P>
(For an amusing take on the history of reading, check out this Norwegian comedy show clip – with </p><p>English subtitles – of a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQHX-SjgQvQ">medieval help desk</a>.)
<P>
References:
<P>
1. Pearson, P. David (2001). "Reading in the Twentieth Century" CIERA Archive Tech Report #01-
08. Ann Arbor, MI: CIERA.<BR>
2. Stahl, S.A., & Miller, P.D. (1989). Whole language and language experience approaches for 
beginning reading: A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 59, 87-116. <BR>
3. Wolf, D.P. (1998). Becoming Literate: One Reader Reading. Academic Connections, 1-4.<BR><BR>
]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Amy Tracy Wells</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1471/pipcomments.asp">
<title>Securing Private Data from Network 'Zombies'</title>
<description><![CDATA[As more of us integrate social networking into our daily lives online, the layered privacy choices we make through our in-network interactions are becoming increasingly complex. ]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As more of us integrate social networking into our daily lives online, the layered privacy choices we make through our in-network interactions are becoming increasingly complex. 
<br><br>
In the process of creating accounts on social networking sites, many users embrace the "fix it and forget it" approach -- either choosing to accept the default privacy settings or making deliberate choices to customize those settings to their own preferences. And while these initial choices might serve us well for some interactions online, the process of managing our privacy preferences on these networks often requires us to have a dynamic, evolving conversation with the applications we use. 
<br><br>
Beyond the basic decisions we make about restricting access to our profile through settings, users are faced with a myriad of choices about what we share and who we share it with each time we post new content, add an application, accept a new friend, or join a new group. 
<br><br>
As noted in an Associated Press article, <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jAuyKv_MsvuPxywZozMzFJtLvF1wD90ACTEG0">"Social Networking Applications Can Pose Security Risks,"</a> the implications of these privacy choices are often not fully understood. Of particular interest in the article is the rising popularity of Facebook applications, programs that are designed by third parties to provide added services and games to users. 
<br><br>
Every time users agree to start interacting with a new application, they agree to share their names, networks, and lists of friends with the Facebook Platform applications. In addition, those who read the "Platform Application Terms of Use" will see that they also give their consent to share "any information provided by you and visible to you on the Facebook Site, excluding any of your Contact Information." 
<br><br>
So, what happens to all of the excess data we routinely entrust to the kind folks who created the "Zombies" application or "What Kind of Dog Would You Be?" Do the Zombies really need to see the photos of my cat to know best how to attack me? 
<br><br>
How this information -- which can include things like your birthday, your dating interests, or your photos -- ultimately gets used by these third parties is a bit of a mystery. Clearly, some applications, such as the popular online word game Scrabulous, use basic demographic information to serve up relevant ads while a user engages with the interface. 
<br><br>
Yet, as enterprising young researcher <a href="http://www.cs.virginia.edu/felt/privacy/">Adrienne Felt</a> has shown along with her colleagues at the University of Virginia, developers are often granted access to much more data than they actually need to ensure that the application functions properly. 
<br><br>
As Dan Solove points out in a recent <a href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/02/facebook_applic.html">post</a> to his Concurring Opinions blog, even the most conservative users who refuse to add any applications to their profiles still end up sharing many of those same details with third parties via their friends. (The default settings on Facebook permit the sharing of profile information with applications your friends choose to add.)
<br><br> 
CNET writer Chris Soghoian emphasizes the <a href="http://www.cnet.com/8301-13739_1-9854409-46.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=SurveillanceState">challenge</a> this presents to users: "To restate -- if you set your profile to private, and one of your friends adds an application, most of your profile information that is visible to your friend is also available to the application developer -- even if you yourself have not installed the application." 
<br><br>
Fortunately, the user can easily change these default settings with a few clicks. But those who are sensitive about the information they share may be surprised to find that their friends have inadvertently disclosed their personal details to third parties -- especially if it turns out that they're also Zombies. 
<br><br>
<i>This post also appears on the Thinkernet Forum <a href="http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=588">here</a>.</p><p><br><br>
For recent related research from the Pew Internet Project, see:</p><p><a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/229/report_display.asp">"Digital Footprints: Online Identity Management and Search in the Age of Transparency"</a></i></p><p></p><p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Mary Madden</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1470/pipcomments.asp">
<title>Participatory Medicine</title>
<description><![CDATA[Participatory medicine and why people are "looking for the mouse."]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My speech at a conference on <a href="http://www.worldcongress.com/events/HL08003/index.cfm?confCode=HL08003">Consumer Connectivity & Web Empowerment</a> gave me the opportunity to quote this excellent Clay Shirky <a href="http://www.herecomeseverybody.org/2008/04/looking-for-the-mouse.html">post</a>:
<blockquote>
I was having dinner with a group of friends about a month ago, and one of them was talking about sitting with his four-year-old daughter watching a DVD. And in the middle of the movie, apropos nothing, she jumps up off the couch and runs around behind the screen. That seems like a cute moment. Maybe she's going back there to see if Dora is really back there or whatever. But that wasn't what she was doing. She started rooting around in the cables. And her dad said, "What you doing?" And she stuck her head out from behind the screen and said, "Looking for the mouse."
<P></p><p>Here's something four-year-olds know: A screen that ships without a mouse ships broken. Here's something four-year-olds know: Media that's targeted at you but doesn't include you may not be worth sitting still for. 
</blockquote></p><p>As we reach <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1455/pipcomments.asp">saturation point</a> in internet and cell-phone adoption and <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_2.15.08.htm">basic activities</a> of daily life port online, it seems that more and more people are asking why they can't <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1467/pipcomments.asp">email their doctors</a>, use <a href="http://www.diabetesmine.com/2008/04/health-stuff-on.html">mobile health gadgets</a>, and <a href="http://www.e-patients.net/archives/2008/05/epatient_interv.html">be their own best advocates</a>. To paraphrase, health care that's targeted at you but doesn't include you may not be worth sitting still for.  Health care reform is too big for most people to grasp, but participatory medicine is not. <P>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Susannah Fox</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1469/pipcomments.asp">
<title>Talking about teens, writing and technology on NPR</title>
<description><![CDATA[Today, Amanda Lenhart and Richard Sterling, the chair of the National Commission on Writing's Board, were guests on the Tech Tuesday edition of the Kojo Nnamdi Show...]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><p>
Last week, the Pew Internet Project in conjunction with our research partners at the <a href="http://www.writingcommission.org/">National Commission on Writing</a> (an initiative of the <a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/splash/">College Board</a>),  released a report titled <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/247/report_display.asp">Writing, Technology and Teens</a> that looks at the impact of technology across the social and academic writing of teens.
</p>
<p>
Today, Richard Sterling, the chair of the National Writing Commission's Board, and I were guests on the Tech Tuesday edition of the Kojo Nnamdi Show, a Washington, DC based radio program produced out of a local NPR affiliate, WAMU. On the show, Richard and I had the opportunity to expand on many of the findings of the report and connect them to broader concerns about education and writing today. To <a href="http://wamu.org/programs/kn/08/04/29.php#20693">listen to the show</a>, download the audio file on the <a href="http://www.wamu.org/programs/kn/">show's webpage</a> on the <a href="http://www.wamu.org/">WAMU site</a>.
</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Amanda Lenhart</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1468/pipcomments.asp">
<title>What is the roll [sic] of traditional righting [sic] and grammar in the digital age?</title>
<description><![CDATA[Informal writing conventions - they're not just for teenagers]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of all the figures in our recently released report on <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/247/report_display.asp">teens and writing</a>, none has captured the imagination of the media quite like the finding that the conventions of electronic communication are filtering into the writing that teens do for school. We found that nearly two-thirds of teens admit to using some form of informal text in their school writing: half use non-standard punctuation and capitalization, four in ten have used text shortcuts (such as "LOL"), and one quarter have used emoticons.
<p>
Given the concerns that this has raised about the future of writing, it's worth stopping for a moment to note that this trend is hardly limited to teens who take notes with one hand while texting their friends with another. As Garance Franke-Ruta notes in <a href="http://thegarance.com/archives/1069">this insightful post</a>, the growth of the blogosphere has created an entire journalistic universe of lightly-edited text in which traditional grammar and punctuation are less important than substantive content or exposure to new and interesting information.
<p>
To use one example, University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds' influential <a href="http://www.instapundit.com/">instapundit</a> blog consists almost entirely of links to interesting articles along with fragmentary bits of analysis (a typical post may consist of nothing more than a link plus a comment such as "Heh" or "Indeed"). And as traditional journalistic ventures such as the Atlantic Monthly or the Economist have jumped into the blogospheric fray, the lines between the two modes of writing have blurred substantially. Franke-Ruta's post was inspired by her friend and Atlantic blogger <a href="http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/">Matthew Yglesias</a>, who is one of the most insightful young journalists out there today--as well as a serial grammatical offender with an illustrious history of mis-spellings, inappropriate homonyms and bizarre punctuation. 
<p>
Franke-Ruta predicts that we are entering a world in which meaning is more important than form, and where writers are judged more on the content of their arguments than on their pristine spelling. This is not to argue that traditional spelling and grammar have no use, or that we shouldn't bother teaching teenagers basic rules for writing. But in thinking about how technology and writing interact with each other, it bears remembering that language has always been fluid and evolving, and that the rules of written speech have always been highly dependent on the tools people use to compose their thoughts. And frankly, I'm personally willing to sacrifice a comma here or there for writing that is engaging, thought provoking and that expands my intellectual horizons.
]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Aaron Smith</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1467/pipcomments.asp">
<title>Are You Impatient for Doctor-Patient Email?</title>
<description><![CDATA[Alicia Chang's <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2008/04/22/its_no_lol_few_us_doctors_answer_e_mails_from_patients/?p1=Well_MostPop_Emailed7">story</a> on doctor-patient email has generated quite a bit of coverage and <a href="http://www.e-patients.net/archives/2008/04/why_doesnt_my_d.html">comment</a> across the Web.]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alicia Chang's <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2008/04/22/its_no_lol_few_us_doctors_answer_e_mails_from_patients/?p1=Well_MostPop_Emailed7">story</a> on doctor-patient email has generated quite a bit of coverage and <a href="http://www.e-patients.net/archives/2008/04/why_doesnt_my_d.html">comment</a> across the Web.
<P>
I'm quoted as saying that "[p]eople are able to file their taxes online, buy and sell household goods, and manage their financial accounts. The health care industry seems to be lagging behind other industries." Here is a link to our internet <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_2.15.08.htm">activities chart</a>, which shows just how popular those "homework" activities are with the 75% of American adults who go online.
<P>
Secure email is just one facet of e-health, of course. For more discussion of technology's role in health care, check out these recent essays </p><p>posted on some influential blogs:
<P>
<a href="http://ixcenterblog.org/archives/526">Realizing the Power of PHRs</a>
<P>
<a href="http://www.tedeytan.com/2008/04/16/871">Ending Secrecy: Physician Makes Case for Full Disclosure of Health Records</a>
<P>
<a href="http://crossoverhealth.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/millennial-health-care-delivery/">Millennial Health Care Delivery</a>
<P>
<a href="http://www.diabetesmine.com/2008/04/health-stuff-on.html">Mobile Health Stuff, Available Now</a>
<P>
<a href="http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/can-we-trust-google-with-our-medical-records/">Can We Trust Google With Our Medical </p><p>Records?</a>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Susannah Fox</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1466/pipcomments.asp">
<title>State-by-State Internet Usage</title>
<description><![CDATA[New state-by-state internet usage figures, courtesy of the NTIA and US Census Bureau]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While doing some other research yesterday, I discovered that the <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/">National Telecommunications and Information Administration</a> (NTIA) recently released new <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/2008/Table_HouseholdInternet2007.pdf">state-by-state home internet usage figures</a> based on the Census Bureau's October 2007 Current Population Survey. Judging by my inbox there is a huge amount of interest in this topic, and the NTIA report is a great, up-to-date resource for people who want to know how their state stacks up with the rest of the country.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Aaron Smith</dc:creator>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/p/1465/pipcomments.asp">
<title>Health Care Consumerism</title>
<description><![CDATA[Deloitte has created a new health consumer typology that is worth checking out, despite their reliance on an online-only sample.]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/section_node/0,1042,sid%253D80772,00.html">Deloitte Center for Health Solutions</a> released a very interesting <a href="http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0%2C1002%2Ccid%25253D192717%2C00.html">report </a> on "Health Care Consumerism" which looks at five "zones" of activity: traditional health services, self-directed care, alternative and non-conventional health services, financing, and information seeking.  
<P>
I recommend checking out their report for a few reasons:
<P>
1) Many of their findings ring true to me. For example:
<P>
<blockquote>Myth: Consumers trust their doctor to make decisions for them.<BR>
Reality: The majority of consumers want to share decision-making with their doctor; only 20% are content to let their doctor control those decisions unilaterally.</blockquote>
<P>
<blockquote>Myth: Consumers are afraid to use the Internet for clinical transactions in health care, fearing loss of privacy and security.<BR>
Reality: Consumers are comfortable using the Internet to exchange clinical information with their doctor, especially if it results in better coordination of care and improved service. (They believe their doctors should make greater use of the Internet to provide access to medical records, test results and other types of information.</blockquote>
<P>
2) Deloitte Consulting is a big player in this field and they are (or should be) tuned in to discussions about participatory medicine.
<P>
3) We should get used to seeing online surveys cited widely, despite their <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/pollsters-debate-the-internet-314/?mod=WSJBlog">drawbacks</a>.
<P>
I'm going to spend some time comparing their health consumer <a href="http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0%2C1002%2Ccid%25253D192722%2C00.html">typology </a>(24% of consumers are "Sick & Savvy" and 8% are "Online & Onboard") with the Pew Internet Project's communications technology <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/213/report_display.asp">typology</a>.  I wish they had a <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/quiz/quiz.asp">quiz </a>so we could all identify where we fit!
<P>
Comments are welcome at <a href="http://www.e-patients.net/archives/2008/04/health_care_con.html">e-patients.net</a>.]]></content:encoded>
<dc:creator>Susannah Fox</dc:creator>
</item>


</rdf:RDF>