Research Report: The Efficacy of Daniel Kent's Social Free Writing Tool 420 Fables

By Julian Levy, Team Free Right

Abstract

    420 Fables is an online, social blogging tool created by Daniel Kent. The tool imposes a strict time limit of four minutes and twenty seconds in which the user must write a “fable.” After the elapsed time, the “fable” is locked and cannot be edited. The user can then title the “fable” and tag it. It is then available publicly where its quality can be voted on by others using a five star rating system. Some of the tool’s various features may be re-purposed and implemented into Free Right to provide a more incentivized user experience and promote free writing in general.

Description

   Because 420 Fables allows for editing and revision, and does not impose any artificial constraints to deter self consciousness when writing, it is not strictly a free writing tool. It is instead a hybrid of free writing conventions and social blogging. Free writing, as described by Peter Elbow in his essay Free Writing, is paramountly an exercise designed to promote unedited and non-self conscious writing. 420 Fables mandates a timed writing window of four minutes and twenty seconds which allows for a brief story or poem to be written:

The conciseness of the resulting product makes for a more approachable experience compared to other tools that require larger contributions. Novice or amateur writers may not be accustomed to writing for extended periods of time and the brief time constraint accommodates this.  However, 420 Fables cannot be adjusted to allow for longer periods of writing which makes the tool less valuable for a wide user base that may expect more flexibility. The overall experience of 420 Fables itself is not a pure free writing experience, as defined by Elbow’s description of writing continuously without editing oneself. This is because the social aspect of the tool is to share and rate each other’s writings which creates a self consciousness regarding quality, expectations of potential popularity, and an overall sense of judgement during the writing process. These factors affect the experience of the user in ways that are not conducive to the spirit of free writing. The meta goal of 420 Fables is to create popular, highly rated posts, and because the quality of of one’s writing is subjected to the opinions of the community, the personal experience of free writing, and its inherent benefits, are lost. The competition of the meta goal does prove as a good incentive to write, but the backbone of free writing itself is destroyed. The tool also allows the user to title and tag their writings. This creates another digression from traditional free writing in that the user tends to create a ‘self-prompt,’ or narrative their ideas into a coherent, and possibly polished, product. The conformity of subject, topic, plot, and style that arises from this feature of the tool promotes a self-editing during the writing process in order to maintain uniformity and cogency. Tagging, or applying metadata descriptors to the completed writing, also creates an expectation of conformity for the writing in that the user will apply the connotations of their tags to the content of their writing both before and after the writing process; much like adding a title, adding tags affects the writing in ways that distract from the traditional free writing exercise. 420Fables requires the user to make a free account, but a paid account is also available and offers upgraded features that apply toward the promotion of the user’s writing. These premium features emphasize the meta goal of the tool as a social platform, rather than an extension of traditional free writing. For these reasons, 420 Fables acts to promote a version of free writing that does not follow Peter Elbow’s description but instead transforms the exercise into a creative social media tool similar to Youtube, Vine, and Reddit. 420 Fables treats free writing as a basis for content production and de-emphasizes the benefits of the process in its social aspects.

Commentary

     420 Fables offers a unique user experience where free writing is utilized as a means to produce finished, shareable content. This does not translate to the goals of Free Right, where the personal benefits of free writing are paramount. These benefits include the general promotion of writing as a cathartic and imaginative exercise that leads to the continuation of the creative process into other fields of content production. Elbow compares free writing to speaking, in that the content is unedited and produced in an expeditious manner. In this regard, self-consciousness and self-editing are the two major hurdles to overcome in free writing. The features of 420 Fables that pertain to the sharing and voting on user content actually emphasize these hurdles because the end product is meant to be held to a certain, subjective quality. It is for these reasons that Free Right should not mimic the social features of 420 Fables. The primary aspect of free writing is writing continuously, and in this regard, the incentivization of writing through a specified time limit, such as four minutes and 20 seconds may be beneficial. If the user knows that they are only obligated to write for a brief period, then they may feel less indentured to the exercise. Contrarily, the time limit imposed in 420 Fables may also act to rush the user, which can produce an anxiety in the experience that is counterintuitive to free writing in general. Free Right will offer multiple time periods during its testing phase to determine what effect a time constraint has on the user. Free writing is first and foremost an exercise, and not a means for content production. For this reason, the option to title and tag the writing will not be implemented in Free Right. The goal of Free Right is to create an environment that promotes traditional free writing, and for this reason, many of the features of 420 Fables should not be mimicked in the tool.

Resources for Further Study

Elbow, Peter. "Freewriting." Writing without Teachers. New York: Oxford UP, 1973. N. pag. Buffalostate.edu. Web.

Hsiu-Chia Ko and Feng-Yang Kuo. Can Blogging Enhance Subjective Well-Being Through Self-Disclosure?” CyberPsychology & Behavior. February 2009. Web.

Kent, Daniel. "420 Fables." 420 Fables. N.p., n.d. Web.

Mirua, Asako. "Psychological and Social Influences on Blog Writing: An Online Survey of Blog Authors in Japan." Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication Volume 12,

     Issue 4, Article First Published Online: 23 AUG 2007, n.d. Web.