The approach taken by the authors of the two articles was an exaggerated sarcasm. Obviously, the chances of your book catching on fire by simply reading by the fire place is slim to none, but it jabs at the fact that e-readers are being more commonly used now rather than reading from a printed form. Also, the approach of taking modern situations and making someone write out what they would do is very clever and makes the reader (eventual writer) realize what they are most likely already doing in real life. The “old” ways of writing and communicating with people is changing. Rather than sending an interesting article to someone via “snail-mail”, a person can simply click a share button on a page of Huffington Post and the receiver would have the potential to see it within seconds. Much like the method of sharing has changed, the way of writing has as well. The articles by Lanham and Dodd bring to the light how most of writing is done digitally and in most instances in short segments. This can be seen in any number of ways, such as on twitter, facebook, and in some instances text messages, all of which have limits to how many characters you can post. This is why I thought Dodd’s article was a very clever one due to all the situations that he brought to the table and how you had to respond to them. Some of them would be very hard to write out or fit all the information into a format where you were limited to how much you could say. After all the humor however, you should see the main point of both articles, and that is that the way of researching and writing about a subject is truly changing, has very much changed already, and shows no signs of returning to the previous ways of writing and researching, which according to the articles is for the best, and I myself would have to agree with that.