The headline conclusion of Pew’s latest monster survey of the media landscape was the demise of TV news. “There are now signs that television news is increasingly vulnerable,” the authors wrote, “as it may be losing its hold on the next generation of news consumers.”
But the larger story is the rise of the Web, which has surpassed newspapers and radio to become the second most popular source of news for Americans, after TV. This is the graph from the report, in my opinion:
So that’s where we get our news now — and the trajectory is clear. Internet is on a rocket ship up. TV is stable but in soft decline.
But where is the money going? TV channels get affiliate fees — the hundreds of slivers of our cable bundles that are paid out to networks. Radio is supported by some donations and public financing. The rest mostly comes from advertising — and the advertisers still prefer print and TV. As this Mary Meeker slide shows, we spend more time engaging with mobile devices than reading print, but print publications still get 25-times more ad money than mobile.
I have a theory — well, maybe more of a frame — for the message these two graphs are sending. For younger people, the Internet is the new cable news. For advertisers, cable news is still cable news. Among 20-somethings surveyed by Pew, about a third said they watched TV yesterday. An equal share said they saw news headlines from Facebook. The rise of Facebook and social media doesn’t mean the coinciding demise of TV, since screens can be additive. When I watched football on Sunday, for example, I’m also texting on my iPhone and reading the Times on my iPad. The iPad and iPhone didn’t replace the TV. They supplemented it.
But ultimately, attention and money are zero sum, and advertising companies will shift money to meet the eyes wherever they go. And they’re going online
We often worry about lying awake in the middle of the night – but it could be good for you. A growing body of evidence from both science and history suggests that the eight-hour sleep may be unnatural.
In the early 1990s, psychiatrist Thomas Wehr conducted an experiment in which a group of people were plunged into darkness for 14 hours every day for a month.
It took some time for their sleep to regulate but by the fourth week the subjects had settled into a very distinct sleeping pattern. They slept first for four hours, then woke for one or two hours before falling into a second four-hour sleep.
Though sleep scientists were impressed by the study, among the general public the idea that we must sleep for eight consecutive hours persists.
In 2001, historian Roger Ekirch of Virginia Tech published a seminal paper, drawn from 16 years of research, revealing a wealth of historical evidence that humans used to sleep in two distinct chunks.
A woman tending to her husband in the middle of the night by Jan Saenredam, 1595
Roger Ekirch says this 1595 engraving by Jan Saenredam is evidence of activity at night
His book At Day’s Close: Night in Times Past, published four years later, unearths more than 500 references to a segmented sleeping pattern – in diaries, court records, medical books and literature, from Homer’s Odyssey to an anthropological account of modern tribes in Nigeria.
Much like the experience of Wehr’s subjects, these references describe a first sleep which began about two hours after dusk, followed by waking period of one or two hours and then a second sleep.
“It’s not just the number of references – it is the way they refer to it, as if it was common knowledge,” Ekirch says.
During this waking period people were quite active. They often got up, went to the toilet or smoked tobacco and some even visited neighbours. Most people stayed in bed, read, wrote and often prayed. Countless prayer manuals from the late 15th Century offered special prayers for the hours in between sleeps.
And these hours weren’t entirely solitary – people often chatted to bed-fellows or had sex.
A doctor’s manual from 16th Century France even advised couples that the best time to conceive was not at the end of a long day’s labour but “after the first sleep”, when “they have more enjoyment” and “do it better”.
Ekirch found that references to the first and second sleep started to disappear during the late 17th Century. This started among the urban upper classes in northern Europe and over the course of the next 200 years filtered down to the rest of Western society.
By the 1920s the idea of a first and second sleep had receded entirely from our social consciousness.
He attributes the initial shift to improvements in street lighting, domestic lighting and a surge in coffee houses – which were sometimes open all night. As the night became a place for legitimate activity and as that activity increased, the length of time people could dedicate to rest dwindled.