The Digital Revolution has brought many benefits and profound societal 
changes. As we endlessly skim the web seeking “information rewards” like crazed lab rats, are we in danger of losing cognitive function, the ability to read and think deeply? Are our brains being re-wired by the very machines and technological channels that we mistakenly believe we control? Has the master already become the slave?
Having just finished reading the astonishing “The Shallows” by Nicholas Carr, I am in vociferous agreement with his assertions on the dangers of cognitive overload and the risk of depletion of reasoning skills. Carr (formerly the executive editor of the Harvard Business review, and blogger), the author of “The Big Switch: Rewiring the World, from Edison to Google” famously posed the question “Is Google making us stupid?” And quite frankly, over-reliance on “search memory”, the neurological bombardment of constant digital stimuli and exponential demands of multi-tasking appear to be making us ‘flighty’ and intellectually shallow. Web pages are skimmed in an “F-shape” pattern in approximately 20 seconds. But, a “poor life this if full of care, we have no time to lift finger from mouse and stare” – and contemplate.
Carr questions if Google is a search engine or is it really (along with its Web cohorts) nothing more than a massively sophisticated distraction engine?
The Church of Google
Google’s business model is built on the art of distraction. Velocity counts, the paradigm demands constant skimming, link jumping, and attention hogging (chat, social platforms, RSS feeds, information sources akimbo). Web commercialisation, click revenues from advertising demand constant motion. A consumer ‘at rest’ decays in value. However, velocity through the digital mire may reward the AdSense gods, but does little for our comprehension, except service (and indeed reinforce it) with the banal and superficial.
From Socrates to Plato to Nietzsche
I hear screams of ‘Luddite’ echoing across the digital expanse. And true, the oral tradition of Socrates wrestled with the written tradition of Plato. Much would be lost. The concern was unfounded, and with Gutenberg’s printing press led to a surge in intellectual mass-cultivation and enlightenment. The tools we use become part of us, and we become part of them. As Carr reminds us of Nietzsche’s relationship with his typewriter:
“The Writing ball is a thing like me: made of iron
Yet easily twisted on journeys.
Patience and tact are required in abundance,
As well as fine fingers, to use us.”
We must not ignore the effect the tools we think we control, control us and shape us to their every whim.
Plasticity of the Brain
And it is indeed the marvellous plasticity of the brain that is its undoing. “What fires together, wires together” is a truism of the construction and reinforcement of neural circuitry. The brain adapts, and seems to be adapting to the attention deficient world of the web, and not necessarily to our benefit. Our ability to comprehend and subsequently ruminate over weighty or lengthy topics appears to be in swift decline. The speed at which information can be consumed appears to be a significant determining factor in its perceived quality and importance (an observation not lost on me in the way I have to structure blog articles).
Omni-visibility
For an number of years I have been interested in the concept of Web 2.0 “Presence Engineering.” In essence the automaton of self, always on, always present, always engaged. But as Seneca said: “To be everywhere is to be nowhere.” I therefore (taking heed of Carr) redefine omnipresence as omni-visibility. Multi-channel visibility is different to multi-channel presence. The former is advertising, the latter is fulfilment of brand promise. Substance comes with deep thought, contemplation, originality and innovation. Servicing web presence leads us into the same trap as the lab rat hunting for its next pellet. Consider therefore if you would benefit from greater digital disengagement in 2011, switch off the Kindle, buy some challenging (paper based) brain food and head for a secluded and tranquil glade for neural regeneration.
The Ultimate Book Worm
Carr also discusses Google Book Search and the extremely ambitious project to ‘digitise all of the world’s printed books.’ A wonderfully altruistic goal it might be argued, except for (copyright infringement aside) the placement of a single digital library in the hands of an humongous private enterprise. Monetisation of access, content ‘unbundling’, slice and dice and book mashups will surely follow. But is there a chimera under the dust cover? Why burn books when they can be digitally shredded? Search results could be skewed to present books ‘leaning to towards a certain ideology’, in digital form publication is transient – facilitating a re-write or implantation of propaganda revised narrative. And if a worm ever did get loose inside the great digital library, how could we ever trust the integrity of the word again?
Related Posts:
Recent Comments