In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr
lays the foundation for a compelling argument regarding how the Internet has
managed to rework the wiring of our brains. He dives into a newfound human tendency that suggests
attention spans are shortened due to ease of access to a plethora of sources
from all around the Internet.
Initially, I’m offended. I
read what I deem to be thousands of pages of material for my classes each
semester and produce papers, projects, and presentations for said classes. But for every novel, there is a related
Sparknotes book published online; for each online journal article, there is an
abstract; and for each Google search there are related keywords and similar
searches. Carr asserts: “The advantages of having immediate access to such an
incredibly rich store of information are many, and they’ve been widely
described and duly applauded.” The
Internet has undoubtedly made our lives easier, but does that mean it has necessarily
made us stupider? Who might this level
playing field of knowledge disadvantage?
Reading news headlines, breaking news alerts sent to one’s
iPhone, and Wikipedia searches are habitual actions that belong to the new
generation. But does a generation
of skimming rather than reading impact our democracy? Carr also advises that even newspaper fanatics can read a single
page of top news stories in the New York Times, without having to thumb through
the entire newspaper. Does being
the “skimming generation” make us less informed than previous generations who
tediously read every word of the daily paper? Admittedly, I subscribe to a news summarization site that
sends me an email early each morning with the top stories and key facts for the
upcoming day. Coincidentally, that
site is appropriately titled: “The Skimm.” Until now, I merely thought I was minimizing the time it
would take me to read a newspaper and not once have I stopped to contemplate
the significance of my actions.
Reflecting seriously upon my daily Internet usage, I’m guilty again. While reading the article, I managed to
take a quick detour to both BuzzFeed and Pinterest. I frequently end up seeing the film production of the book
before I can finish the novel that the movie was based off of. I believe that if someone were to put
an iPad in front of me, I would instantly open the Safari app to begin searching
the web, rather than opening the Kindle app. These examples relate to the theory of electracy, as
described in Ulmer’s article.
“’Electracy’ is to digital media what literacy is to alphabetic writing:
an apparatus, or social machine, partly technological, partly institutional,”
according to Ulmer. Perhaps
electracy is to blame for the changing environment of our digital media intake,
but I believe it is also revolutionary.
The skill set necessary to transmit and receive digital media is one
that will be studied for many years to come, and will be diligently taught to
future generations.
No comments:
Post a Comment