"preferably not on a screen" (Score 1)

This article covers two particular issues: that of the usefulness of blogs (this part seems to be a backlash against the 'angry masses' who apparently pummeled him about some other article) and the usefulness of Google as a method for finding valuable information. More precisely, the second part is a simple remark that Google is not a good tool for studying information, and that those who infer otherwise are, in essence, fooling themselves. Hardly any reasoning is presented in the article at all, just opinion.

However, I do find myself wondering why it is important if someone reads information from a hard copy rather than an electronic screen. It seems to me that it is the ideas that are important, not the method of conveyance.