As an email in my inbox this morning greeted me, Welcome to Day 3 of being a Freelance Writer!'

So far I've written five blog posts (elsewhere, clearly, as this blog hasn't been updated since Sunday), sat in on a press conference call, got my first freelance paycheck (hellz yeah), baked banana bread and ginger cookies, taken a meal to some friends who just had a baby, started a new writing project, read, contemplated setting up QuickBooks, conducted some research on social gaming blogs, done dishes, made homemade hummus and naan, listened to the new David Byrne album - all in all, pretty darn busy and pretty darn happy.

The one thing I haven't done enough of this week is experiment with the iPad. It's in the hands of Kaia now, Kin's 9-year-old daughter. Look for us to write a joint post soon, reviewing some of the device's gaming applications.

If I had a wry sense of humor (ell oh ell), I would say something terribly witty about being so busy creating content this week that I've had to steer clear of the content consuming tool du jour.

But as many folks continue to debate whether or not the iPad is useful - magically useful or banally so - I can't help but think this divide between content creation and content consumption a bit of a false dichotomy.

Exactly what counts as content creation? Sure, I can't make the sequel to Avatar on my iPad. But I can't make it on my laptop either. (Nor would I, of course - how would little ol' me ever come up with as creative and original idea as that?! ) But for most of the work I do - the content I create - the iPad works just fine. I can blog, I can tweet, I can update my Facebook status.

Or does this not count as creating content?

You know, some of the arguments against the iPad strike me as rather Matthew Arnold 2.0, as though somehow there is Content Creation - which must be protected if we want Culture to thrive.

I'd contend that tweeting, blogging and the like are creative acts and that for the vast majority of us, these are the types of content we're busily creating thanks to the proliferation Web 2.0 tools, mobile technologies (smartphones and now iPads), and ya know, good ol' fashioned computers. Of course the iPad's capabilities are circumscribed when compared to the latter, but to say that the device is solely for content consumption (that real content creators use different tools) simply isn't true.

To argue that the iPad fosters a gulf between the consumption and the creation of content - and ne'er the twain shall meet - ignores the important relationship between the two, namely the way in which what we consume informs what we create. In my profession, at least, I spend a lot of time consuming content before I'm ready to create. In other words, I read. Then I write. I don't think this applies just to non-fiction writers and bloggers either. Creativity does not occur in a vacuum; we are inspired by what we see, what we hear, what we consume around us.

The more I read about this supposed gulf - the consumption versus the creation of content - and even now as I try to articulate some of my displeasure with the whole damn discussion, the more I abhor the very language we're using to have this conversation. Consumption in particularly is such a weighted term. And while, sure, when we interact with the written word, with music, with video and so on via the iPad - particularly in conjunction with the iTunes marketplace - we are consumers. But we're also readers, music fans, film aficionados. To label us consumers (and to distinguish us from creators) seems to reinstate an old division that ignores the DIY culture that flourishes online and offline. To suggest that this divide is rigid (and/or that it's based on the tool we hold in our hands) seems like a very reactionary stance on creativity, even when this stance is taken in the name of protecting creativity and culture from the likes of Steve Jobs.