The Perils of a Truly Digital Age
Justin Cash
TweetName:Justin Cash
Member of: 
Joined: Dec 2011Occupation: studying PPE at Durham UniversityJustin's Full Profile
Before I begin, I have to acknowledge how ironic it is that you will inevitably be reading this piece on some kind of digital medium, and will have most likely discovered it though the social networking sites that are a hallmark of the digital age in which we live. And of course I believe technological advances have lifted millions out of poverty, conquered many previously incurable diseases, and made our daily routines a heck of a lot easier; only a fool thinks otherwise.

But the digitization of modern life comes at a cost. ‘Trolling’ is a term that is used far too jovially given that it often describes what amounts to nothing more or less than bullying. Take the Samantha Brick piece published in the Daily Mail last week. I will never personally defend her disgusting narcissism but, glancing at the comments section underneath her article, some replies were in fact highly offensive, and her email inbox was inundated with hundreds more hateful messages.
Technology is also changing the patterns of crime. The Wikileaks hacks, for instance, showed how one insecure server could change political landscapes across the globe. On a slightly less dramatic scale, a quarter of British adults have either been a victim of identity theft or know someone who has, according to Which? Magazine. Again, there is an irony in the fact that the comparatively archaic method of shredding documents is now one of the most reliable ways to prevent ones identity being stolen.
Part of the problem is that we have become too reliant on our digital devices. When tens of millions of Blackberry users experienced intermittent service outages last October, there was global outrage. Keyword global. Now so much of our information comes to us online, we should really be taking the time to filter out the thousands of unreliable sources that we do unfortunately rely on. What is more, we now get our news in such a truncated, synopsized way that we are seemingly failing to properly look at the issues, settling for sound bites instead. Or cats in bread. Thus we slowly but surely ensure the banality of our society through our consumption of technology.
My fear is that this reliance on digitization will begin to noticeably infect our interpersonal skills. Our ability to go out and actually experience the real world is already limited by the exorbitant amount of time we spend on forums such as Facebook and Twitter. True, computer literacy is a fine business asset, but you can’t teach the interpersonal skills needed to succeed in the workplace via the web. We would do well to remember this as digital media inevitably fortifies its position of influence in our lives.
Tweet
vouchers




I agree to an extent that technology is becoming more and more of a staple within society: it is the age in which we live in. Coming from my point of view – a student of the medium of video games, and a strong interest of digitization – this is definitely something that needs to be addressed. Laws and legislations, ethics and morals: when covering “digital medium”, these seem to take a double-standard depending on the situation. The lack of consistency with protecting identities, rights and ownerships irritates me, but that is besides my point.
The point that I want to make is your last paragraph: your “fear is that this reliance on digitization will begin to noticeably infect our interpersonal skills”. Now, I am not disagreeing with this and I have no research or evidence to disprove this, but I take e-mail as an example. As early as 2005 (I had just started high school), critics and “media experts” slandered e-mailing and stated arguments such as “it will never work” and “you’re anti-social if you use e-mail”. Now, look at the time we live in: e-mailing, texting, even calling someone from a handset is accepted because of the society we are living in: we have grown up with these mediums of communications and therefore deem it acceptable to use. It doesn’t make us talk to people differently: I personally don’t have any problems with making a conversation with anyone I text or e-mail, and I don’t think it has damaged interpersonal skills among society (maybe spelling and grammar due to “speed texting”, but that does not necessarily include interpersonal skills).
All I’m saying is that technology and “digitization” does not necessarily mean people are socializing less or having less of an “experience” of the real world. Networks like Facebook and Twitter have their fair share of criticisms and opinions by everyone, but they have adapted to the time period we are in – quick, fast and accessible information – and have, in fact, contributed more to interpersonal skills than causing any form of detriment.
I think you have misunderstood what the meaning of trolling is. The comments regarding Samantha Bricks’ piece was bullying. Her article was trolling (or what people thought was trolling – turns out she was very serious!)
Trolling is when you bait someone into reacting to something you have said, written or done. Usually it is someone being annoying, saying something outrageous, etc.
Bullying is saying it is ‘disgusting narcissism’ rather than simply narcissism. Narcissism on its own could be hyperbole, or a fact, or even a diagnosis. Disgusting implies that there is some personal discord with the person described.
‘The banality of our society’ – synonyms including unoriginality, dullness, predictable. The very antithesis of the internet and technology (you seem to interchange between the two when talking about devices). My guess? Just a flashy sentence you put in with no real thought.
Also looking at this sentence again (‘Thus we slowly but surely ensure the banality of our society through our consumption of technology’), you have defined technology to be medical equipment (first paragraph), laptops/computers (wikileaks hacking), smartphones, and the internet (you talk about the news, and cats in bread leading up to the quote in question). Which exactly is ensuring banality? Is cats in bread really an example of banality? It is a rather unique concept… You started off very well with the point about Blackberrys, and then veered off. It would have been better if you had continued that chain of thought, perhaps noting that you can see a group of friends in a bar, all looking at their iPhones rather than engaging with each other. Instead you somehow got onto the topic of the news (and speak for yourself, I have no idea where you get your news from!)
There is another medium where there are thousands of unreliable sources. They are called books.
We have had the internet for more than 10 years. Strangely, most of the population are still capable of interpersonal skills. Those who aren’t (including me, due to my brain wiring) have found a novel way of connecting with people where we previously could not. I am going to assume that you obviously know this, but this is the problem with an article heavily weighted to one side. I don’t know how much you know.
I suppose this article is part of the banality of technology. This wasn’t a fresh or new article, and you settled for writing sound bites that make no sense when you think about it. I guess you were being more ironic than you realised. In future, be careful with your word usage.