A visitor uses his iPad to take a photograph of a painting titled "The Kiss" at an exhibition showcasing works by Spanish artist Pablo Picasso in the Art Gallery of South Australia in Sydney.
Before I tell you how many hours a day people spend watching content on tablets, TVs, phones and so forth, because a polling group’s done the legwork and compiled a bunch of numbers, let’s talk quick about technology. The word, I mean, which according to my dictionary’s primary definition means “the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes.”
These days, you say that word and I’d wager most conjure images of tablets, smartphones, digital cameras, satellites, cruise missiles, electric cars or glasses-free 3D handhelds. That’s all correct, of course–that stuff’s definitely technology, I mean. But so is a wheel, or a pencil, or if we’re going all the way back, it’s any tool, including something as simple as a wayward stick snatched up and applied to some purpose, be it clubbing something for dinner or prying up a rock to get at whatever’s underneath.
The reason I raise the point, is that the following poll implies, as subtext, that something different’s happening when we pick up an electronic tablet in lieu of pencil and paper to compose an email, or an e-reader in lieu of a book to read something like the digital version of this magazine, or a novel by Stephen King. Those of us who view change as bad, or at least a little bit terrifying, may look at numbers like the ones below read ominous signs in the tea leaves.
But okay, hold that thought, and let’s jump to the poll’s results.
The poll was conducted by Poll Position to determine “how many hours a day do you spend looking at either a TV, computer screen, e-reader, PDA or cellphone?” The group asked that question of 1,220 registered voters, by phone, on November 19, 2011 (the margin of error: ±3%) and the results are weighted to represent “all American adults.” Its generalized finding: 60% of Americans spend between one and six hours a day viewing content on electronic devices.
But that doesn’t tell us much. What if 90% spent one hour a day, or all six? No problem: The poll breaks the 60% total down by viewing time, thus:
1-3 hours: 31%
4-6 hours: 30%
7-9 hours: 22%
10 hours or more: 12%
Spend no time: 2%
We’re nearly at thirds here, making this an easy poll to talk about in terms of pie slices. About a third spend one to three hours, another third spend four to six, and the remaining third spend between seven and more than 10 hours a day viewing content on electronic devices. Assuming most of us spend between 12 and 18 hours per 24 hours day awake, that’s a pretty evenly upscaling range of use, from one hour through 10 (or more).
(MORE: Who Really Invented the Computer?)
article continues on next page…
Other interesting takeaways: The results reveal predictable correlations between age and use (if we assume a correlation between early or late technological acculturation). The older you are, the less time you’re likely to spend with electronic devices in a given day, so for instance, 28.8% of those aged 18 to 29 spend one to three hours a day watching electronic devices, compared with 40.6% of those aged 65 or older, but jump to “10 hours or more” and 16.5% of those aged 18 to 29 are engaged with electronic devices, compared with just 4.3% of those 65 or older. There’s also an ethnic difference: 34.3% of those describing themselves as “White” spend one to three hours a day watching electronic devices, compared with 24.1% of those describing themselves as “Black,” but jump to over 10 hours and things reverse–12.2% White and 20.1% Black.
Gender-wise, there’s little difference between the sexes, just a few points one way or another, with males leading by the most–about seven points–in the four to six hour slot. But jump to “10 hours or more” and men and women are tied at 12%. It’s about the same if you sort by political affiliation, though those identifying as “Independent” tend to be notably less engaged in the one to three hour slot, but notably more so in the higher viewing ones.
The implications of a shift in hours-per-day to electronic technology aren’t clear, since the poll doesn’t identify specific devices or usage type, but we can make some general assumptions. Like: Consumers of news content on electronic devices probably get more up-to-date and, in theory, more in-depth information as well as more angles on that information (I’m thinking about content linking and social networking in particular) than those engaging with older media (print newspapers or radio). We’re also, it stands to reason, consuming a lot of electricity.
And there’s the “shift” question: How fare along the gradient are we in terms of new replacing its antecedents. The poll doesn’t specify prior group totals to indicate where we’re at–it’s more like a snapshot–but I’m assuming the surge in tablet, smartphone, e-reader and e-book sales underlies many of these numbers, and you can probably draw your own conclusions about any of that without my help. I’ll note that I live in Ann Arbor, Michigan, ground zero for the recently defunct mega-bookseller Borders, and I watched this summer as first one store, then two more–including the company’s flagship store–were shuttered.
What any of this isn’t: a surprise. Not really. Though electronic devices come with caveats, including all the less desirable info-juggling (advertisements, spam, privacy concerns) that eats into those hours, they offer users an escalating range of choices–economic, social, informational, educational–the older mediums simply can’t. That makes them exactly as important as the stick, the wheel or the pencil were when those shifts occurred, and who knows how many orders of magnitude as powerful.
MORE: Meet Intel’s Crazy 50-Core ‘Knights Corner’, World’s First 1 TFLOPS Processor
Matt Peckham is a reporter at TIME. Find him on Twitter at @mattpeckham or on Facebook. You can also continue the discussion on TIME’s Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.