Is Writing Only Words on Paper? Why We Must Broaden Our View

By Rachhpal Sahota,

U.S.A Editor Babushahi Network

Is a writer only a person who produces pages of text? Or can a writer also be the mind behind a 60-second reel, a long-form interview, or a science explainer? In a world where audiences are as likely to watch as they are to read, the definition of writing may be overdue for an update.
For centuries, writing has been understood as the art of putting words on a page — whether ink on parchment, type on paper, or pixels on a screen. This definition has served us well, but in today’s world of multi-platform communication, it may be too narrow.
I say this not just as a novelist who has published in multiple languages, but also as a creator of bilingual science content, a producer of long-form expert interviews, and as the U.S. Editor for Babushahi, a multilingual online newspaper. My career has taken me from corporate science labs to storytelling in every imaginable medium — and I’ve learned one thing for certain: the heart of all good communication is still writing.
From Page to Screen — and Beyond
In the traditional sense, writing was silent, linear, and text-bound. The reader engaged one-on-one with the printed word. This is still a powerful and irreplaceable experience. But in the 21st century, writing has evolved into something more: the invisible architecture behind every podcast, documentary, speech, and short-form reel you watch.
When I produce my “nuggets of science” reels, the process always begins the same way a short article would:
1.    Research the subject thoroughly.
2.    Distill the idea into a tight, one-page bilingual script.
3.    Shape every sentence for clarity, rhythm, and emotional connection.
4.    Then — and only then — add visuals, music, and editing.
Strip away the video layer, and what you’re left with is pure writing.
The Long-Form Side of the Story
Beyond short reels, I also publish long-form interviews with leading experts. These conversations — whether in English or Punjabi — are shaped by the same skills I use when writing an investigative feature: preparing questions, structuring the flow, anticipating the audience’s curiosity, and telling a story through the exchange. The editing process that follows is, again, a form of rewriting — deciding what stays, what goes, and how best to serve the narrative.
If a documentary script can be considered writing, why not a deeply planned interview that lives on video?
The Common Objections — and Why They Miss the Mark
1. “Writing is about producing text, not video.”
That’s a definition rooted in medium, not method. Writing is the blueprint. The final product might be a printed book, a website article, or a scripted video — but the creative process begins with words.
2. “Videos are a separate skill set — cameras, lighting, editing.”
True — video production has extra layers. But those layers are built on top of the writing. Without the words, there’s no story to film, no argument to follow, no emotion to evoke.
3. “Videos are easier to consume, so they’re less serious than reading.”
Ease of consumption doesn’t equal ease of creation. A great poem may take months to perfect even though it takes seconds to read. Likewise, a 60-second bilingual science reel might look effortless, but behind it are hours of research, drafting, and rewriting.
4. “Language matters — if the audience doesn’t understand it, it’s irrelevant to them.”
That’s a practical concern, but not a definition of writing. A Punjabi short story is still writing even if the reader speaks only Hindi. The same goes for a Punjabi science script. Language defines reach, not legitimacy.
Why Inclusiveness Matters
Today, we communicate in a hybrid world. A news article may link to a video. A speech may be transcribed into a blog post. A podcast may be turned into a social media carousel. When we insist that “writing” only counts if it lives on paper or a text-only screen, we exclude a huge body of work that carries forward the core skills of the craft: research, structure, clarity, persuasion, and style.
As someone who straddles worlds — a novelist, a science communicator, a long-form interviewer, and an editor in a multilingual newsroom — I see how artificial these boundaries have become. The tools change. The audience’s preferred medium changes. What doesn’t change is the need for good writing at the foundation.
Closing Thought
Writing has survived every technological shift because it adapts. The printing press didn’t end it. Radio scripts didn’t end it. Television didn’t end it. The same will be true of video. What matters is not whether the words arrive on a page or a screen, but whether they move, inform, and connect.
If we can broaden our view of writing to include its many modern expressions, we will make room for more voices, more creativity, and more ways to reach the people who need to hear our words — whether they read them or watch them.

Follow Babushahi Network Channel on WhatsApp