"A respected Swiss scientist, Conrad Gessner might have been the first to raise the alarm about the effects of information overload. In a landmark book he described how the modern world overwhelmed people with data, and that this overabundance was both “confusing and harmful” to the mind. The media now echo his concerns with reports on the unprecedented risks of living in an “always on” digital environment. It’s worth noting that Gessner for his part, never once used e-mail and was completely ignorant about computers. That’s not because he was a technophobe but because he died in 1565. His warnings referred to the seemingly unmanageable flood of information unleashed by the printing press.
These concerns stretch back to the birth of literacy itself. In parallel with modern concerns about children's overuse of technology, Socrates famously warned against writing because it would "create forgetfulness in the learners souls, because they will not use their memories." He also advised that children can't distinguish fantasy from reality so parents should only allow them to hear wholesome allegories and not improper tales, lest their development go astray.
The Socratic warning has been repeated many times since: The older generation warns against a new technology and bemoans that society is abandoning the wholesome media it grew up with, seemingly unaware that this same technology was considered to be harmful when first introduced.
When radio arrived we discovered yet another scourge of the young: The wireless was accused of distracting children from reading and diminishing performance in school, both of which were now considered to be appropriate and wholesome. In 1936 the music magazine the Gramophone reported that children had "developed the habit of dividing attention between the humdrum preparation of their school assignments and the compelling excitement of the loudspeaker." And described how the radio programs were disturbing the balance of their excitable minds.
The television caused widespread concern as well: Media historian Ellen Wartella has noted how "opponents voiced concerns about how television might hurt radio, conversation, reading, and the patterns of family living and results in the further vulgarization of the American culture."
The skepticism and fear continues today:
"By the end of the 20th century personal computers had entered our homes, the Internet was a global phenomenon and almost identical worries were widely broadcast through chilling headlines: CNN reported that “Email hurts IQ more than pot,” the Telegraph that “Twitter and Facebook could harm moral values” and the “Facebook and MySpace generation cannot form relationships,” and the Daily Mail ran a piece on “How using Facebook could raise your risk of cancer.”
But we’ve not a shred of evidence to back up the claims:
"All of these pieces have one thing in common, they mention not one study on how digital technology is affecting the mind and brain. They tell anecdotes about people who believe they can no longer concentrate, talk to scientists doing peripherally related work, and that’s it. Imagine if the situation in Afghanistan were discussed in a similar way. You could write 4,000 words for a major media outlet without ever mentioning a relevant fact about the war. Instead you’d base your thesis on the opinions of your friends and the guy down the street who works in the kebab shop. He’s actually from Turkey but it’s all the same though, isn’t it?"
Mmmm, Kebabs. But alas we need to be scared of something:
"In contrast the accumulation of many years of evidence suggests that heavy television viewing does appear to have a negative effect on our health and our ability to concentrate. We almost never hear about these sorts of studies anymore because television is old hat technology scares need to be novel, and evidence that something is safe just doesn’t make the grade in the shock-horror media agenda.
In short, older media institutions whipping up fear of the newer media institutions."
For the full article click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment