Tag: social media

Clusterfuck: Discernment in this Digital Age

I think we can all agree on this right?

The world has gone utterly mad. And worse, it has gone mad in a way that is unprecedented in most of human history. Too much change, too fast, too ubiquitous, too much erasure of past norms and expectations, too little by way of solid, sensible alternatives.

My singular take is that this era has thrown more at all of us than most of us can handle. I was just beginning to get a handle on the internet and all it offered when social media and its myriad applications and then AI comes along. Now I have a whole new cast of applications to explore and yet another new language to learn. All the while wondering if my intimate questions are being stored in some highly secretive database to be hauled out to my competitor’s advantage should I consider running for local council at any time up the road.

As a writer, I am well familiar with “prompts” designed to oil the internal writing machine and get words flowing. Now there are “AI influencers” willing to teach us how to write the most effective prompts to get the best answers for whatever thorny philosophical issue we are currently ruminating about and specifically targeted to whatever AI application we are using. Woof.

In the face of these myriad new options, we secretly struggle with the attendant anxiety that the very Bot we are pouring our hearts and intimate thoughts out to may one day circle back and enslave us in a way we have not yet even imagined. All we know (or fear) is: “Machines may one day take over the world!” (You mean they haven’t already?)

We used to have “trusted” sources to rely on to navigate our lives. Or at least calm us down. It almost seems naively comical now. The media. The church. Government (okay, I know that is a candidate for serious debate about trust). And God help us, our elders. People who have lived for a few decades and had enough life experience to actually guide the next generation with wisdom and clarity. Snort. The words “antiquated” and “Dodo bird” come to mind. They have wisdom and experience all right. The problem is their advice just isn’t particularly relevant in the face of the modern technological era.

I come from the generation that transitioned from no TV to “three channels to choose from” TV to color TV. Pop quiz. How many channels are there worldwide now? Don’t worry. I don’t remotely claim to know how many there are either. That appears to be a generic problem today. Too many choices. Too few “trusted sources.” Little to no integrity in our leaders or in our institutions.

So here is the task that lies before us individually. Discernment. The joy of youth is the promiscuous exploration of the many and various options life has to offer. People date extensively. They travel worldwide. They may move fluidly through several jobs among different career paths. Humans are fundamentally creatures of habit and structure. We are limited after all.

The myriad of choices available now are more overwhelming than freeing. Eventually one must choose a path and stick to it. You can choose the path of eclecticism, of course, flitting from pursuit to pursuit. But that usually leads to fragmentation in your spirit and in your life.

I remember when rising to the top of a career needed the single minded determination of a sperm heading for the egg. Success meant having to out swim and outlast all of its competitors to claim the prize of fertilization. Victory was well-defined. A baby was the trophy for all that effort. In the work world, it was the chase of promotion after promotion, pay raise after pay raise, elevation from the cubicle to a corner office. Retirement one day with the promise of a gold watch and a pension that would sustain you until the grave.

Work models in the modern era? Utterly upended. Today there are a hundred different paths to a hundred different prizes all with the promise of varying degrees of legitimacy and success. Remote work? Once a beleaguered office worker’s pipe dream is now constrained only by the strength and stability of your internet connection. Fame? Accessible through many platforms if you have the requisite discipline and messaging to sustain a consistent and engaging online presence. And pensions? Those are mostly cheap accommodations in major cities around the world.

In therapy, they say acknowledging there is a problem is the first step on the path to resolving it. Hear, hear. Acknowledging that the tsunami of technological change has come on way too hard and too fast for most of us to comfortably absorb and process it all is a strong start. And instead of social cohesion, fragmentation in the general population is entirely understandable. When everyone can be famous or heard or develop an online presence, how does one choose the path that is right for them individually? Who do you listen to?

I keep coming back to discernment. Instead of mindlessly, scrolling hour after hour, take time to let information drift its way through your psyche and see what fits for you. Use your imagination to conceive of what your life might become if you pursue what really matters to you. Learn to use the internet and the amazing tools it offers to get clarity instead of stuffing your intellectual attic with yet more “life hacks.”

We are living through an unprecedented historical revolution. Stability will emerge on the other side because that is what human beings seek and crave. The trick individually will be to come out of all this upheaval intact and with a sense of self you can live with and still recognize as you. Accept that and buckle up. Stay alert and keep your eyes open and wits about you. That’s what I’m going to do anyway. Take what I say with the proverbial grain of salt. I am a single voice among billions.

Turning Tides

In The Atlantic, I recently read an article with the tragic title: Why The Past Ten Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid, and the even sadder sub-title: It’s not just a phase,” by writer Jonathan Haidt.

I read Haidt’s article with a curious mix of horror and hope. Let me explain.

We all know – or should – that we are living in unprecedented times. I hadn’t been sure when the “tipping point” occurred but by author Haidt’s calculation, it was around 2010.

It was during and after that year that social media evolved from being benign social sharing platforms into something immensely more insidious and hateful.

Added capacities on social media platforms such as “share” buttons and “retweeting” meant that any random ideas or comments – no matter how wrong, inflammatory or hysterical – could spread like wildfire.

Viral posts could elevate someone’s profile for a short time or destroy someone in the same timeframe, depending. This capacity for viral gang banging has been deadly on our society, our mental health and our level of trust in established institutions set up to guide and oversee our collective stability and well-being.

Once upon a time, the leaden processes of discourse and change drove me nuts. To achieve or change anything, there were protocols that deemed, and often doomed, positive change, especially if a quick response was required.

As most of my early work life was in academia and government, I would shudder when an issue needed to be submitted to and resolved “by committee.” Committees met infrequently. They were often populated by self-interested windbags more interested in the sound of their own voice than in speedy and positive resolution of anything.

My mind often moved more quickly tin those days to a “logical conclusion.” I saw committees as largely self-serving, pedantic entities that doomed many great ideas to the dustbin. Death by attrition.

At this time in history, decision-making power over important issues was concentrated in the hands of the elite few. That was the case in universities, government, sometimes churches, and definitely in financial institutions.

Enter the internet and social media. Global game changers. But not in a good way as it has turned out. There is a strict separation between the left and right. There is an erosion of trust at all levels and in all institutions. The problem will not go away or get better, Haidt points out, as AI informs and adds to the mountains of disinformation so readily available and consumed.

I now find my support for the internet’s possibilities much more conservative. I was excited to my very core when the internet emerged. I lauded its democratic promise. Now, I reasoned, anyone, anywhere, with a computer and wifi had access to all of the knowledge in the world. Wow.

Its ramifications for artists and innovative thinking were limitless, I reasoned. Authors rejected by traditional publishers for their whole careers could now find a corner of the internet where their writing could be read. Their manuscript could be published. It might be dreck but it was their very own dreck.

Free speech would arise in unison from all corners and classes, I reasoned. Free speech combined with easy access to information and facts would create a more democratic and just society. How naive was I?

Jonathan Haidt writes: “The story of Babel is the best metaphor I have found for what happened to America in the 2010s, and for the fractured country we now inhabit. Something went terribly wrong, very suddenly. We are disoriented, unable to speak the same language or recognize the same truth. We are cut off from one another and from the past.“

Haidt continues: “… Babel is not a story about tribalism; it’s a story about the fragmentation of everything. It’s about the shattering of all that had seemed solid, the scattering of people who had been a community.“

It is the conclusion of Haidt’s article that heartens me. He identifies pockets of sanity and resistance that are emerging. Hallelujah. Haidt alludes to something that has been on my mind for some time. It is “We the People” who must work ourselves out of this mess.

We collectively recognize the downward and unpleasant shift in angry and violent discourse because we are living it. Here is where we must recommit ourselves – as in so many instances – to self-salvation, if there is salvation to be had from technology’s less positive influences.

“In recent years, Americans have started hundreds of groups and organizations dedicated to building trust and friendship across the political divide, including BridgeUSA, Braver Angels (on whose board I serve), and many others listed at BridgeAlliance.us. We cannot expect Congress and the tech companies to save us. We must change ourselves and our communities.“

Excuse me while I head over these websites to see how I can do my part in bringing this runaway train back into line. You may hear more about this issue from me. It feels critical to sustaining our democratic institutions and processes.

Even more important to my personal hobby horse about elevation of the health and well-being of individuals, it feels critical to recapturing our collective sanity and peace of mind.