Promoting Illiteracy???

It has been months since I have bothered to read the online version of my hometown newspaper--in part, because there isn't much in there of relevance to me, and if it is, my mother usually tells me about it. But because today seems such a slow news day, I thought I would drop in and see what was up... an interesting op ed piece on the Native American origins of the Groundhog Day tradition (Can't we pass that off to another culture, please?)... and then my favorite arrogant editor who did not feel like pontificating on politics for a Monday, listed out a series of trivia facts... many of which I already knew. And then I got to thinking about one he included: "Twenty-two percent of Americans are functionally illiterate; fewer than 10 percent are trilingual." The irony amuses and sickens me.

This is not a shocking statistic if you pay attention to these kinds of things; but when you consider that the newspaper in question really did very little--and continues to do very little--to support the library expansion in the community, you have to wonder. You have to wonder why a newspaper would do little to promote literacy in the community... their sales are not that great. I'm not just saying it is this community or this particular paper--I'm talking generally now. Libraries were once highly regarded insitutions and yet, now they fall miserably behind the latest punt, pass or kick. Sort of, even the Olympics lost out to American Idol.

I remember when I was at Central Michigan and the controversy as I was leaving was that the library needed an expansion (and it seriously did--they had no room for new books and storage was running low), but see, the Univerity made the althletic training facility top priority. I came across a quote the other day that I'm reminded of now: "If you want to get laid, go to college. If you want an education, go to a library." Well put, Mr. Zappa, may you rest in peace.

I propose that many journalists (there are some for whom this does not apply) do not want to promote literacy in this country for the following reasons:

1. Journalism is not the most literate form of writing. Those who can read and think have little respect for most journalists. Those who cannot read think journalists are intelligent and know a lot. The journalist will take that 22 percent.

2. No one wants the President to figure out what is going on.

3. There is power in maintaining a caste system--which illiteracy, one could argue, creates.

Aside from #2, I think these are the main reasons, on a more subconscious level, for why so little is done by the print media to promote reading and literacy in the U.S. Disagree with me if you want to... I encourage it, actually, but think about what would happen to journalism--especially small papers, if we had 100 percent literacy in this country, and 22 percent more of the population actually read and thought about what was printed on a daily basis. The implications, I believe, are huge; the havoc would be wreaked.

Mahalo.