We will discuss Douglas Rushkoff’s Present Shock: When Everything Happens Down at our meeting on Wednesday, November 4th at 4:15p.m. in the GAHS library. Please post questions, comments, concerns, criticism, and the like on this blog prior to, during, or after our meeting (before November 6th if you want extra/replacement credit). All questions and responses should indicate an active reading of the text and function to move the conversation forward. (Note: surface-level or obvious questions and responses will not count as participation for grade replacement.)
Those of you unable to attend due to scheduling conflicts may participate in the discussion below by posting a discussion question and offering a detailed response, or by responding to two questions already posted. The note above applies here as well, so heed it!
In Douglas Rushkoff”s book Present Shock, he discusses how humans always feel the need to be connected to the world. Do you think that this is a result of new technology or do you believe this is just a part of human instinct; to want to know the unknown?
Rushkoff is good at observing the evolving technology culture and how we, as human beings, are affected by it. He theorized that things are changing so fast and we would soon lose the ability to cope. He points out the “technological distractions” that arise in everyday life and how these distractions are making us less willing to do for our own, while we watch others do. I believe though that our need as humans to be connected to the world is our human instinct to know the unknown and that this new technology is more or less really a way to counteract the idea that we are losing touch with reality. So, the new technology really is trying to help us stay connected rather than drive us further away.
In Douglas Rushkoff”s book Present Shock, he examines the relationship between people and time, how it has transformed, and how it causes us to ultimately become disconnected with reality. In Chapter 3- Overwinding: The Short Forever, he argues that our immediate accessibility to things, whether it is Facebook, news, or music, reduces our opportunity and responsibility to make connections with the future. Facebook, for example, brings everyone we have met and could meet all together in the present, and when the internet permanently locks in the information and media of people like this, it makes it easier for other people to be able to access it at anytime. I think this is something many people nowadays struggle with, especially kids and teenagers our age. We can get so caught up in sharing the moment at the very moment it happens we tend to forget the effect (good or bad) it can have on us at a later time. This example he gives demonstrates how we can shorten a forever by ignoring the fact that no matter if the post is deleted, it will forever live on in someone’s hands. Just because people usually update their feed to see the most recent posts doesn’t mean they can’t pull up one from the past, even if it was deleted.
In one part of the book Rushkoff talks about modern day interuptions. He says that because we have ended up in such a digital universe we always have our devises strapped to us with notifications at our fingertips about things we shouldnt even care about. In the past he says the only time u were interupted on a phone call was if there was a death but now there are three call waitings every phone call u have. Some disagree saying you have the option to ignore these other messages but Rushkoff says that because you had to make three decisions during this one call you arent fully attentive to the person your on the phone with. I also have to say I don’t agree with this because though he is right that it has happen almost every phone call to me. But because teqnology is so avdanced you can put things on do not disturb or decline in an instant that you really arent missing any of the call. Plus because we are so teqnology savy and multitask in almost everyday senarios I think that in todays generation we know how to make these disitions while still having a full conversation.
“Present Shock” was an informative novel that referred to modern day technological effects on society. Moreover, it revealed the intersection with technology and culture. Personally, I found the book very intriguing and relevant to current situations. While I could not fully relate to certain topics, other were seemingly reflective on myself. Douglas Rushkoff gives a title and form to the character of the future. Likewise, it persuades the audience to consider the benefits and the drawbacks of evolving technology’s effect on culture. Rushkoff states, “Computers don’t suffer present shock, people do. For we are the only ones living in time” (76). In response to Rushkoff’s statement, how do you believe that society should (or should not) change our technological advancements in order to benefit our future era? Also, do you believe that the author’s text effectively informed the reader?
I think that being technologically advanced is not a bad thing its just sometimes how caught up we get in it that we forget about things. “We may be in the midts of some great crisis, but we are simply to bussy to notice” (73) Technology isn’t a bad thing we just need to use it to solve our crisis instead of the way we are using it now. Also I believe as a reader I was somewhat effectivley informed. Now a days though its so often that we are told how caught up in our devices we are and are told that by are parents frequently. Rushkoff sort of just brings it all together and says a little more about what is happening because we are and they other effects of present shock. Although he really did not provide any useful solutions to how to solve present shock it was eye opening. On the other hand, reading it did make me fearful of the future because I felt as if he was saying there is no hope for us. It would have been more comforting if he provided ways to solve are problems and give us a little bit of hope.
I agree with Rushkoff”s statement about people being the ones who suffer present shock. Sometimes we can forget this because technologies are becoming so advanced. Technology can complicate things because while it tends to take over our lives, it also helps us progress and learn. We must remeber that in order to be consumed by technology, like we are currently, it takes effort to be put in by people. Therefore we are only hurting ourselves, I don’t think society should change our technological advancements in order to benefit our future because technology is not at fault, the people that abuse it are. Technology has the power to save and improve lives. It is up to us to decide whether to use the power of technology for good or for evil.
In the chapter, Overwinding: The Short Forever, Rushkoff alluded to the everlasting identity created by social media when he stated, “Moreover, Facebook pages can be temporarily hibernated, but they cannot be removed.” (155.) . Every day, millions of people post on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram without even thinking of the result of their statements. For some, posts lead to fame and praise, while for others, posts lead to ruined reputations. Do you think that the permanent profiles created by new technologies and social media have a positive or negative impact in our world?
The permanent profiles created by new technologies and social media have a negative impact in our world because it creates virtual relationships and friends, but causes a lack of real ones. Due to the lack in in-person communication, the relationships between people in the world can be fake. People promote themselves online how they wish to be viewed rather than who they truly are. For example, on online dating websites people often lie to seem more appealing. Social media also ruins relationships between individuals, we can never tell what tone of voice a person is typing in so things are often misinterpreted. Miscommunication can cause tension and conflict between people, which leads to a chain reaction, causing what we know as a “twitter fight”. The conflicts between people grows larger and people who were not in the argument to begin with start to contribute. People hide behind their online identity, not owning up to themselves which also causes us to lose important social skills. By not taking responsibility for actions, the tension grows into personal offense. Technology and social media create fake identities that can hurt people emotionally (and can often lead to physical conflict) as well as strip people of their valuable social skills.
I think that social media profiles can be both negative and positive. If used correctly, social media can encourage friendships and fun interactions. Although it is possible to be positive, in today’s society it is more negative. People use social media to expose people, especially through cyber bullying. I believe that cyber bullying is one of the biggest negatives that has come from the uprising of social media because its so much easier to interact behind a computer screen rather than a face to face conversation. The permanent profiles left behind cause more pain and exposure to things that people rather would leave in their past, especially when many teenagers go into job interviews. While many believe that the “delete” button erases a drunk tweet or a accidental snapchat, companies have access to almost anything they want to find. They often find their way around private settings and know more about you’re life than you realize. Therefore, the everlasting profiles that are being created every second have the opportunity to be positive, but hurt us more than help us.
I believe the permanent profiles created by new technologies and social media have drastically negative impact on today’s world. In today’s world you see so many kids and young adults all over social media saying and spreading things that have you questioning today’s generation. Kids don’t realize that colleges, jobs, and even your high school can see what you post on social media. Kids have ruined their reputation over silly posts that they didn’t pause and take time to actually think about what they were about to say. Many colleges can tell a lot about a student by just checking their social media accounts which could potentially prevent them from getting into the school they dreamed of. Another negative impact it has on our society is that nowadays you see so many kids being bullied on social media and spreading around harmful rumors. I believe social media can mess with a kids self-esteem. This generation is so caught up with having the latest technology and the coolest things and the most followers that they are blind to see what good things can come out of social media if used correctly. In today’s society, social media has a very big negative impact on the way kids grow and develop, therefore I believe these “permanent profiles” have that negative effect as well
Present Shock kept me interested as it pointed out flaws in our way of thinking and acting that many other authors would be afraid to do. We as a society has changed from progressing in the future to progressing in minute. Rushkoff mainly attributes this disassociation/ distractions to technology and social media. Although, technology and social media play it a big role, it is mainly the users fault. For generations people have been concerned with the impact of technology (tv, radio, etc) on the world but only until today we have misused the technology. Humans have this inner desire to be gratified, appreciated, and liked by others. We used to look to others, such as our family and friends for this, but now we use Instagram likes to somehow quantify ourselves. I believe the problem is deeper than technology and social media but a problem with the way we interact with others. We used to accept people with disabilities, people of other races, people with different values, but now we outcast them as if their opinion is less valuable then our own. This lack of proper interaction with others has forced people to seek for an outlet of appreciation. People turn to social media and technology for this, and are eventually consumed by these. We have created the problem for our society and we can fix it (not by playing video games as Rushkoff has stated) but to open our perspectives to others in an attempt to becoming a more embracing society.
My favorite part of the book was Chronos and Kairos. He talks about the difference between time and timing. Time is Chronos and Kairos is timing. It makes sense that we no longer think of time as actual time, we think of it as a certain amount of time we must accomplish something. We are focused more on timing due to the fact that we know we only have 24 hours in a day to do something. I’m sure before clocks were invented, people did worry more about when the sun was going to go set or rise, but now we can easily check our phones and it’ll tell us what time it is all over the world and when the sun is setting and rising all week. This is a way technology has taking over. There’s so much to do in such a small amount of time that it puts people in a frenzy, an example of this is Black Friday. You only get 12 hours to get all the things you want for a discounted price. So my question is…
Can there be a balance between chronos and kairos in today’s society? If so, how?
There must be a balance between the two or humans will suffer. No matter how much we choose to exist using Kairos, our bodies still operate on Chronos. Choosing to stay up all night to stay connected will eventually make you sick, Pushing yourself to keep up in a world with infinite information at our fingertips causes stress and eventually illness. Kairos works in a technological world, but not so much in a human world where the body needs rest and nourishment as well as relaxation. Mediation and yoga are popular now as a result of our need to operate outside of technology and to explore other means of understanding the world. As Rushkoff states in his chapter on digiphrenia “People are still analog.” We can be in more than one place at a time through technology,but physically we can only be one.
Balancing chronos and kairos will require a huge mental shift. Instead of looking at our time as every second ticking on a clock, we should view each second holding a different opportunity than the last. Yes, it’s true that some moments are simply more valuable than others. But in order to balance both chronos and kairos we must change our view of the true meaning of effectiveness. Though we want to use our minutes and seconds shrewdly as possible, we need to slow down and be at ease, enjoy how you’re living. “Perfect” timing is a goal must every human being tries to reach in their every day life. This is the real world, so sometimes we need to focus on deadlines and staying on track in order to survive (chronos). But when we do so we must possess joy and passion in order to remain sane (karios) ,we humans need to remember to balance time orderliness but don’t let that keep you from simply living life.
Rushkoff’s book, “Present Shock”, delivers a pessimistic view on the progression of technology in the 21st century, while providing numerous examples detailing the constant battle mankind has with technology. Humans have evolved over thousands of years into the dominant species we are today, but has rapidly become more efficient over this last century due to the advances in technology. While areas such as medicine, transportation, and media can be useful, Rushkoff highlighted many instances in which technology took the reins over humans. It’s the classic instance of the fictional world in which robots take over their creator and make them their slaves, but to a less obvious degree. While technology is undoubtedly influencing mankind, the sheer influence is too much to control sometimes, and it leaves humans feeling left behind and constantly working to keep up. The style of writing and the complicated syntax carried throughout this book is an extreme irony, one in which I believe was intended, that shows that on some levels, Rushkoff exemplifies the characteristics in which he shames. By expressing his ideas as incomplete, choppy thoughts stringed together by nothing more than the same placement within a paragraph, Rushkoff epitomizes the short-attention spanned persona of this current generation. Nowadays, people are too ready to move on, too ready to get past the present, too ready to get to another point, that they are unable to be stagnant and enjoy the current environment in which they are located. “Present Shock” carries a motif that is ironic in itself by depicting the same qualities that are being debased throughout the book. While urging for the immediate change in the reader, Rushkoff conveys a sense of urgency in which the reader feels immediate change is necessary in their own life to counteract this social injustice. Do you feel like change is needed and must be immediate, or is this just making a big deal out of something insignificant- such as the negative hype surrounding other forms of technology?
In the book Present Shock, Rushkoff explains the book in a way stating that we really dont have a sense of time. That the priority for our minds, outcomes and our goals are a in the “now” phase. Priorities are everything and is seen as everything in this moment. In Apocalypto, Rushkoff explains what his happening now, in the present, gives us a sense of fantasy to what will happen in the future. Making us believe in better things and outcomes than the actual turn of events. For example, the preppers stock their underground housing and living because they believe that the zombie apocalypse is actually going to happen. Also in Overwinding, he explains the issue of how we now try and squish a meaningful event that should be spread out for a various amount of days into a total of one day, such as Black Friday. People prep for this days and even weeks in advance, sleeping outside of the store in order to be one of the first people in line, but the actual overall day of Black Friday consists of one day. This also ties in with the fact of the Apocalypto chapter which also talks about prepping for something in the future. The chapter Overwinding is somewhat foreshadowing the last chapter of the book, Apocalypto.
Also in the chapter, Digiphrenia, Rushkoff starts by telling something he experienced, when he went to Berlin and was not able to access the internet and his phone would not work because he was in another country and he felt he was not able to do anything in the time he was waiting to get his room key. As well as saying people are too busy living in the now, Rushkoff also believes people are too reliable on technology, including himself. He believes people need to stop worrying about the lives of others and get out and live our lives and interact with the people around us. Has technology kept us from strengthening our communication skills, and how might society react if all technology broke for a day? What would happen?
Rushkoff implied that this present shock mindset was singular to our generation alone, which I think can easily be refuted. In economics, there are naturally occurring shifts and changes (recessions, depressions, booms, etc.) that can define certain time periods. Similarly, present shock isn’t unique to the 21st century but is a result of fluctuating ideals. As it pertains to history, present, past, and future shock can be identified during different time periods. For example, the Protestant Reformation and the decades beforehand were characterized by people’s devout religious beliefs. In my opinion, religion is one of the most forward-thinking concepts because it relates all of one’s actions to how it will affect your acceptance into Heaven. Therefore, the Protestant Reformation can be seen as an example of future shock. On the other hand, the Enlightenment is a perfect example of past shock. Philosophers dedicated their lives to relating ancient Greek and Roman texts and ideals to their world. Evidently, present shock is yet another natural phenomenon of human evolution. By arguing that “in our era” we are facing new challenges that will drastically change humanity, Rushkoff created an unwarranted sense of panic. What the author left out was the multiple occurrences of shifts in people’s focuses throughout history, and that this seems to be yet another natural transition. While our generation faces unique challenges pertaining to an overwhelming amount of technological developments, it is actually a predictable development when you look at the bigger picture.
As a teenager growing up in the 21st century, filled with the hysteria of rapid development of technology and the continuous expansion of access to new information, Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now by Douglas Rushkoff gave me a new perspective on everyday life and culture. Throughout the pages of the novel, Rushkoff argues to his readers that recent technologies, as favorable they may seem, has transformed the way we perceive time and creates a continuous pressure for society to always been connected to social media and technology.
Out of Rushkoff’s five main theories of how we are reacting to the rapid expansion and reliance on technology, I found the concept of “Digiphrenia”, described in Chapter 2, to be the most thought provoking. With the help of narrative about how he realized “he could be in two places in once” during a trip to Germany, Rushkoff depicts to his readers encounters and moments are now perceived in two ways; our actual experience and the virtual observation. During this chapter, I reflected on how mannerisms have changed in result of the expansion of technology. Glancing casually at a screen while in mid-conversation, which was once considered rude and inattentive, is now accepted etiquette. This chapter made me reflect on my knowledge from AP Pyschology, specifically the concept of cultural norms (a shared idea or expectation on how to behave, strengthened by habit), and how of culture’s norms have been influenced by extensive use of technology, thus making it a mannerism to always record life events on social media and always be virtually connected to others. I continued to reflect on the change in social norms within young children, where kids who used to commonly “disconnect themselves” through playing imaginary games and dress up, now spend time virtually connecting with others over computer games and social media.
After reading this novel, I believe that technology has placed our generation in a “win-lose” situation. We now have access to a plethora of information, yet no longer know how to disconnect ourselves from the constant obsession with the virtual world.
Discussion Question: Within Chapter Five, Ruskoff discusses how it is human instinct to find a way to abandon issues rather than searching for a plausible solution. He supports this argument with the example of science fiction movies and the common theme of zombies within literature and television. Do you believe modern technologies have played a role in aiding this desire to act “in lieu of doing the actual
hard work of fixing.”(246)?
Yes, I do believe modern technologies have played a role in the way people have taken a present issue and contemplated the ways we will react to it in the future. As Rushkoff says, “The crisis of global warming morphs into the fantasy of living off the grid.” (246), these exaggerated reactions come from the media and their attempt to make dramatize situations. Modern technologies, including social media sites, have allowed more problems to be recognized, and critically examined. The way people examine these issues, however, reflects the present shock the novel discuss. When people are first given news of a crisis, or any major decision, they begin planning for what they can do now to impact their future. Rushkoff references “‘The CNN effect'” (46), a phrase officials at the Pentagon associated with the media, when discussing the dramatized news stories and their effects on the audience and those involved. This effect would not have occurred if it was not for the advances in technologies and its development overtime into one of the main sources for information regarding current effects. Modern technologies have developed the way people plan for the future, and live life in the present as well. Regarding acting “in lieu of doing the actual hard work of fixing.” (246), people are more conscious of the effects events will have on their lives than the attempt to solve the problem. Modern technology plays a role in this because our awareness of certain aspects of our lives have increased because of new amenities. Having a greater awareness of possible conflicts or problems that arise in our lives gives us more opportunities to contemplate the effects it will have on us and how we can avoid it all together.
One of the most outstanding parts of “Present Shock” was how incomplete many of Rushkoff’s arguments felt. A lot of what he was saying seemed like a reach because he never fully connected his ideas in a way that made sense. In particular, I believe that he left out a key argument that could have really benefited his overall assertion – a term one of my old teachers dubbed as “our ADHD society.” With the instant gratification and essentially limitless possibility for entertainment at our fingertips, especially for those who never lived through the original days of the internet or writing a paper by searching through books at the library, our attention span’s have suffered. We are used to skipping commercials on TV, lightning quick internet, and finding out information that used to have took a look in the encyclopedia to figure out in a second. Show like Bevis and Butthead, SouthPark, and many sitcoms play on this. Missing a few minutes or even a few episodes doesn’t hinder one’s ability to find it funny or understand the joke. With thoughts being compressed to 140 characters and experiences to a few pictures on Instagram, there is no longer a need to pay attention like there once was. Children don’t have to wrestle with boredom and use their imagination to have fun when an iPad loaded with games is just a swipe a way. This need for instant gratification and our unwillingness to try and focus on one thing for any extended amount of time goes hand in hand with this “now” culture. Not only are we fixated on living in the moment, we simply don’t want to take the time to do anything but that.
Rushkoff mentions, “We’re in the game, all right, but playing on many different levels at once. Or at least we’re trying to.” (68), when discussing the modern technologies individuals of this generation are strongly influenced by. What do you think is the main cause for this common trend for people to be connected with the world at all times? Is it a trait specific to a country, generation, or community?
I think that our generation (generation y) has the feeling of needing to be connected with others through technology. Other generations never had the ability to interaction through social media as adolescents, so now they don’t feel a “need” per-say to have it. While kids today have grown up with technology (computers, IPods, etc.) so they have the urge to take a selfie, instead of actually having a face-to-face interaction with someone.
I believe the reason that our generation constantly has the need to be on our phones and on social media at all times is just because of the evolution of technology. As we continue to improve our technology kids will continue to what the most advanced and high-tech item out on the market. Kids will continue to spend time and time on their phones and eventually through time find that they need to be connected with society at all times. I do not believe that the need to be connected to society is relevant in just one country. However, I do believe that is most heavily seen in the United States. Kids of even the age of 8 years old are constantly seen on their cell phones, while in other countries many kids aren’t allowed to have a phone. In conclusion, I believe that people do have a need to be connected with society at all times and it will continue to grow as long as our technology continues to evolve.
The main reason why humans feel inclined to stay connected with the world through various technologies is because of the societal influences that surround every individual. Humans were built to fit in with different groups for survival, although survival isn’t necessarily a concern in the 21st century, so we still strive to communicate and relate to our peers. Nobody wants to be the person who never knows what is going on in a conversation, or who is constantly feeling left out due to their lack of knowledge of the digital world. People need to be connected with the world because it gives them a sense of belonging and purpose, while also giving people an outlet for a different form of work. In a world in which an individual must interact with others in order to succeed, there is a lot of social pressure for one to face every day. Technology allows the individual to escape the stressful world and enter a digital one in which they can complete many of the same activities through a screen. There are clear-cut differences between different generations and countries with the use of technology. Younger individuals and individuals in more advanced countries are more likely to use technology, simply because of the availability. Older individuals, however, were raised without the attachment to technology that this new generation possesses, and they are able to go through their days without the need to stay connected with the world.
I think it is a trait processed by primarily the 1st world countries. This is because everyone in these types of societies tries to stay up to date with everything in order to appeal to people. People want to be able to be involved in conversation and share a common social piece with them. This all goes back to people’s need to instant gratification among others (I discussed this in my post). People want to be connected with others and what better way then to be able to interact with them.
We cannot blame our generation for the cause of this technology rush. Yes, my generation is always induce in our phones and computers but without the older generation inventing it, we would not be where we are today.They are following us closely on our heels with their social media habits and reliance on instant information. We can only blame the country as a whole as to why we must stay connected to the world at all times. Why do we choose to stay on our phones? Because we can. We have all this amazing technology at our fingertips so we choose to use it, not always in a good way. We always want to know what is happening and who will be the next social media victim. What twitter fight is happening? Oh my gosh, why did she post that? Have you seen his snapchat story? If we choose to continue to use technology, we must stop neglecting proper use of it.
I believe that our generation feels we must always be connected to the internet because we have this dire need of always needing to know what else is going on around us, or even around the world. Since there is technology available, people don’t find a reason to not use it because it makes things so much easier. I think the heavily usage of cell phones and social media is simply appealing to my generation because it makes us feel like we’re part of something. When we have the ability to find out the; weather, time, or what you’re friend posted on their twitter feed just in the matter of seconds, we feel more comfortable going on with our daily lives. This use of technology is influenced by other medias that make it seem like its something you cant live without. How many teens do you see that don’t have some sort of cellular device or piece of technology that can allow them to stay in touch with the world? (in the 1st world countries) Close to none, most every teen feels comfort while knowing their cell phone or ipod is within arms reach because it has turned more into a need than a want. Parents provide their children with cell phones as a way of protection since today’s world is unpredictable. If their child is ever in danger they have the ability to dial a view numbers to call for help, this keeps a parents mind at ease. If kids are provided with the product they have the ability to use social media and have the constant need of checking it because its right at their fingertips.
The main reason why people feel so inclined to constantly use various forms of technology at all times and to connect with the world is because of the urge to constantly innovate. In the chapter one (Narrative Collapse), Rushkoff discussed the world’s urge to revolutionize various forms of technology for the new millennium that was arriving. Although he stated that the urge to live for the future collapsed (around 2001), I believe that it still continues today. People want to know However, I think that it is mainly present in industrialized countries such as the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, etc. The reason for this is because these countries have the money and resources to gain access to nearly anything that they want to know. In the horn of Africa, there is a country called Eritrea. I never knew about before this weekend and I discovered that it is one of the most censored, oppressive, and undemocratic societies in the world. After Eritrea gained independence from Ethiopia, they worked to never have to be oppressed from an outside force by oppressing there own people. Thus far, this is the only country that has never held an election. Most individuals in Eritrea aren’t concerned about the rest of the world because they have to worry about their own lives each and everyday. It’s very easy for someone like me to have the urge to gain knowledge about other people and their countries; I don’t live in a society where public gatherings and freedom of speech is prohibited.
I believe the source of which people try to be connected with the world at all times is from country, generation, and community. Every single generation craves to be connected with the world at all times because without it something feels missing and you feel uninformed. I have seen kids glued to their instagrams trying to see what the latest post is and I have also seen adults watching TV trying to figure out what Obama is going to do next. I also think different countries are connected to the world all the time as well because again, you don’t want to be the nation that is most behind on research and development as well as politics. Our community as a whole can also be a main cause for why we feel the need to be connected with the world all the time because others around us are very inquisitive which causes us to become inquisitive and want to know what is going on around us. I believe this wanting to be connected with the world is instinct and not caused by new technology. I believe the reason we feel the need to be connected with the world at all time is because when we are without that knowledge of the day we feel as if we are trapped inside a hole and aren’t tall enough to see over it without new technology. That new technology once it has risen us up beyond the whole shows us the view we cannot see inside the whole.
In “Present Shock”, Rushkoff relates the quote “The end justifies the means,” to our world of interruptions and updates. We live in a constant state of panic, always checking the news, listening for a phone call, text message, etc. Humans cannot experience time the same way our phones, computers, and emails do. Many ignore this obvious fact, and try to accommodate themselves with the timing of our machines. Our phones are turned on 24/7, making us within reach at any hour; our emails are accessible at all hours; the television is at our dispense at any hour. We are kept one step behind what is actually happening in the world through the news and all the constant updates we receive each day. “Media creates time”. This technology-based society was created through the industrial age. The industrial age was concentrated on growth and building for the future. We eventually met our limit of growth, and moved into a society interested in creating and expanding human time. This modified the famous quote “the end justifies the means,” and changed it into an infinite amount of time, a world with no end. We see this in video games frequently, a constant story is kept in play, and the game will never end. We now focus on inventing new models of time.
Are we able to reclaim time? Why or why not?
I believe it’s less of reclaiming time as it is redefining it in terms that relate to society today. The technological advancements that have been made are irrevocable, so it’s not very likely that we can reclaim anything we have lost. It would also be very difficult to persuade a society based on individualism to shift their personal perceptions to benefit the greater good. Therefore, it is now necessary to redefine how we picture time. Time is perceived as a loose concept that we can manipulate by rewinding, fast-forwarding, pausing, or stopping altogether. It is important not to get lost in a technology based second dimension where time in not a structured constant, but a minor abstraction. Even so, it’s hard to place limits around something so fleeting.
On another note, I think it’s interesting that you see media as one step ahead of people. I’ve always thought of it the other way around, as the media and news stations reporting on events that are ‘just-in’ but are actually ‘just-finished’.
I agree with your analysis on how we always live in a constant state of panic; I am a pure example of this. Based on your references and explanation stating that we are just a reach away from the “world” and in the blink of an eye, we instantaneously know something that happens even if it did just happen. News travels faster than anyone can imagine. But to respond to your question, are we able to reclaim time, I believe the only way to reclaim time is to look back on the past and memories you have of that time. We can’t time travel so us ourselves can’t actually go back in time and reclaim it, but the memories and the pictures you have to remember that time is still there which is almost like reclaiming that time. An example of someone reclaiming their time would be in the story from our summer reading book, “Thanksgiving in Mongolia.” Ariel Levy only had that one picture of her son to help her remember and treasure those moments. So every time she looks at that picture, she is reclaiming that time she had with her son. If we were to actually be able to go back in time, and redo something you did and reclaim the good times you used to have, I would never be in the now and never go to the future. I would stay in the past and never want to leave. But since we can’t do that, our mindset is in the now, trying to figure out how to get back to those reclaimed times in the now.
We cannot reclaim the time already spent in present shock; however, there is a solution to escaping present shock according to Rushkoff. “The solution of course, is balance. Finding the sweet spot between storage and flow, dipping into different media and activities depending on the circumstances” (265). This balance seems impossible considering the 5 issues our society deals with; however, it is possible. There is no definite balance that he explains, the individual chooses what their balance must be. It depends how much technology you want to have to keep up with, you could choose twitter, instagram, facebook, pinterest, and snapchat, or you could decided you only have enough time for twitter. Balance is achieved at one’s own will to escape present shock.
Used to in every story on the news, there was a beginning, middle, and end to the story. Now, we are living in the moment, not getting the full story at one time, but learning one bit of news at a time, using websites such as Twitter, CNN, etc. An example of this was during the baseball World Series when the starting pitcher for the Kansas City Royals, Edinson Volquez, dad died an hour before the game with Volquez even knowing that his father had passed, the rest of the world already knew. While the game was going on, the news about Volquez’s father was already all over Twitter and the internet.
I completely agree with the statement you have made above with the influence of social media on our public. I was watching the game at the time and also saw that his father had passed on social media. Tying this to the book, I feel 20 years ago we would have been astonished to know that a random person could know information as important to you as a passing of a family member before you do where as now no one is really impressed by it they just have sadness for the player. Going off of your example, I heard another story where a player saw rumor’s on social media that he was being traded so he began to cry on national television to only be told later they were just rumors and he was still on his current team. Relating this story to your example and the book, this describes the way social media can easily inform strangers about information that is important to you. Now in the present we don’t realize how fascinating this actually is where in the past we thought this could never be possible.
I agree with you post, I felt that it was wrong to for people to know about his father’s death without him giving permission. Social media has made it to easy for people to learn information that they have no right in knowing. No one should have known about the death of Edinson Volquez’s father until he told them, or gave the media permission, which he did not. People need to take a step back and realize that this man is pitching in the World Series. People should be talking about the game and his pitching performance, not his father passing away.
In the Digiphrenia chapter, Rushkoff explores the relation between time and technology. One of his quotes relates to a very controversial question in today’s society. “Kids compete with the clock when they take their tests, as if preparing for a workplace in which their boss will tell them ‘pencils down. The test results, in turn, are used to determine school funding and teacher salaries.” (125) Do you think there is too much emphasis on student test results dictating school funding? How can opportunities for fraud, as exemplified in the Atlanta Public School System scandal in which teachers adjusted student answers to achieve higher scores, be avoided?
I believe the education system places too high an emphasis on test scores rather than focusing on students understanding of a topic. Schools are encouraged to teach specific test answers by memorization instead of depth on the topic. Students will retain the information long enough for the test; however, the information will be lost in the long run. I believe that school funding should not be determined exclusively by test scores because it takes away the focus of education. Removing the connection between school funding and student test scores prevents the incentive for teachers to change test results and would free teachers from being locked into covering specific material. Ultimately, I feel like Rushkoff includes this example to show that the present pressures are altering our behaviors. We are so focused on the present that we have lost sight of the true goal. As shown in the book, we have become stuck on achieving certain test scores and are no longer learning information to continue to use for the future. We want to achieve the test score now and move on.
I believe that in America we set too much emphasis on student test results. Tests like the and the SATs and the SOLs stamp a number onto each student. I believe Rushkoff is trying to tell us that these tests do not show our true potential as a person. These tests don’t show the true talents of a student; however, the tests determine the future of the students. I feel like these problems like the problem in Atlanta could be avoided if less emphasis on test scores. It is not fair to those students that arrn’t able to get into a university or secure a job because of a score that does not accurately represent them.
I feel that the education system does completely focus way too much on the number instead of the actual understanding of the information. I also agree with the statement about the timed tests which in my opinion doesn’t prepare you for your future and only hurts your scores. To answer your questions, I do believe test scores influence economical decisions way to much and a school should not be deprived of resources to make their environment better because of some slacking test scores. If anything money will improve test scores due to better resources, environmental factors, teachers, and technology. Fraud will never be avoided if test scores directly correlate with the amount of money given to a school. Saying that, I feel every school should be paid a fair amount or have a system where schools in greater economically advanced areas will get less money where the ones near low economic status will get more money.
Our society’s education system places too much emphasis on test results. The education system is so fixated on quantitative data to represent student achievement that is becomes the only priority people who fund schools look for. Dictating whether or not a school receives funding based on test scores makes teachers only teach to a test. This changes the student mindset from wanting to learn for the sake of learning to passing a standard test to have a sliver of hope to succeed in life. Why is it that only the schools that perform well get generously funded? Shouldn’t the schools that score lower on these tests be the ones receiving more funding to increase their scores? Quite frankly, the only possible way to stop events such as the scandal in the Atlanta Public Schools system from happening is to prioritize test scores less. A student’s test taking aptitude should be the indicator of a school’s ability to educate its students much less than be the main focus when considering who should be funded and who shouldn’t.
I think the emphasis put on student test results dictating school funding is far too big. Learning the material and being able to apply it to real life situations is much more important than just being able to achieve a high score on a test, especially if those test results determine school funding. If the school board avoided using standardized testing as a method to determine funding, then situations of fraud like the one that occurred in Atlanta could be avoided all together. This is because a greater emphasis could be placed on the actual students and their abilities to apply the information to real world situations, instead of spitting back facts to get the right answers on a test.
I agree with Ruhskoff in regards to the part about the increased emphasis of standardized testing. After I completed my internship over the summer, I realized that mentors don’t base your success off of the time frame in which you complete your work, but the way you do it. For instance, I had to call and transfer information from last year’s database to a new one. I wasn’t measured based on how fast I could do it or the previous knowledge I had about the child care centers; they measured the quality of and the way I completed the assignment. In school, teachers solely prepare us for a test at the end of the year. Then, our scores determine whether or not they receive a bonus and additional funding for the school. As a result, the information students learn goes in one ear and out the other because none of it can be applied to our daily lives. This is the problem. Also, how can a school system base funding off of student test scores when there are schools that have been unaccredited, underfunded, and located within a low socio-economic community for over ten years? There has been plenty of research that correlates low-income communities with low student achievement. However, to avoid instances like teachers adjusting student answers, the reward of teachers receiving bonuses for high test scores should be eliminated. Student’s education should be based on skill crafting and quality, not time-crunching and memorization.
Present Shock was an intriguing book because it shows how our society has changed to where we experience time differently than humans did from the past. People now aren’t worried about the future but are more focused on short-term goals. Rushkoff credits this to the development of technology and mainly social media. Technology and social media has ultimately made this world smaller because family and friends can now communicate across the globe via cellphones, facebook, skype, etc. He also points out that the rapid technology development is causing humans to become more lazy and less likely to to focus on a certain subject. For example, many students now are using google to look up summaries and analysis of books rather than actually taking the time to read the book. Also, the human long-term memory is affected as well. With a tap on the phone, a person can find the definition of any word or fact then quickly forgetting it a couple minutes later. In addition to this, news spreads fast through social media networks like twitter. Now the personal bubbles of celebrities, athletes, or even a highschooler are being intruded and criticized on a much larger scale. Years ago, news would travel a lot slower but now people in New York are hearing about incidents that happen at Glen Allen High School just hours after they occur. Whereas, 20 years ago they would have never known. Is the rapid development of technology helping or hurting humans?
Rapid development is hurting humans because we are trying to learn information as something is happening. Instead of waiting for the full story of anything to come out, we learn bit by bit of an event. If we were not so rapidly growing and wanting to know everything happening, we might actually learn what is going on. Technology hurts us, because social media makes it easier for the little bits of information, that could be wrong, to be seen easier and faster than newspapers. Therefore, technology and the use of it is hurting humans.
The rapid availability and accessibility is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it allows the everyday man to have a much greater and deeper understanding of the world than what was previously possible. Access to a much larger amount news as it happens allows us to become more worldly and up to date with current issues; however, there is no way to ensure that this information is correct or complete.
I agree completely with everything stated in Annan’s statement. I think it is mind-blowing how our current era is not focused on the future and solely what is going on with our lives at this moment. I also believe that rapid technology development is hurting our nation and the people of our nation. Although it has its benefits us humans are becoming more and more lazy and less hardworking. The evolution of our technology throughout time has created such an impact on everything in our lives. I like how you mentioned that social media creates a way for news and other headlines to travel so fast. I think it is crazy that within a day New York already heard about the little accident that occurred at our school. Overall this was a great post and I agree 100 percent.
Like Abby stated in an earlier comment, this rapid availability and accessibility of information is a double edge sword. The instant access to events as it’s happening is a positive, because is allows people to stay as up to date as possible. It connects everyone together in a sense, especially in the case of what happened with Glen Allen recently. However, at the same time, it allows more room for error when reporting these events. Nowadays, reporters only want to make a profit from their writing, so they will misconstrue the truth, so they will take the first thing they hear and roll with it regardless of the truth.
On the other hand, I do not think that it is the rapid development of technology hurting us, but it is the people who spread false information. Widespread communication due to the rapid development of technology has been much more beneficial to the world than it has been detrimental.
I believe that the rapid development of technology has both hurt us and helped us as a society. The quotation, “The journey disappears, and all knowledge is brought into the present tense.” (152) appealed to me because it showed how the younger generations have become more shallow than the older generations because of new technology. The younger generations have become much more interested in the answer, instead of the process used to find the answer. This is because they have grown up in a time where they can simply ask siri what the answer is and get it. I believe that this has had a negative effect on society because the process is far more important than spitting out the answer. One can learn much more about the topic by investigating or researching the desired topic, and coming up with an answer on their own. This tendency has led to things like the cases of fraud in Atlanta’s Public School System.
On the flip side, the development of technology has aided people in times such as emergencies or simply reconnecting people with their old friends. If used correctly, technology can be an excellent thing that enhances the lives of people all around the world. However, far too many people have taken advantage of it, and it has negatively effected their lives.
The rapid development of technology can be looked at from two different perspectives. Technology can be beneficial in terms of keeping people connected from far distances and keeping us up to date on the latest news, but on the other hand technology can hurt our generation and society. By hiding behind screens we lose the ability to create relationships with others and develop social skills. Technology is developing so fast it is almost overpowering, it’s starting to become smart enough to do things for people. It’s eliminating the need for certain jobs and the unemployment rate is increasing. Also, it distracts people from the world around them, they are too busy playing on the latest and greatest piece of technology instead of exercising or getting out. Technology is leading to obesity, unemployment, and it’s developing so quickly, we are leaving the poor older generations in the dust, dazed and confused.
In the first chapter, Rushkoff focuses on the effects of technology in the present and how our reactions will affect the future. He targets multiple TV shows, but the one that stuck out was Mystery Science Theater 3000. In regards to this TV show, it was found that today’s generation would rather spend their limited free time with televised friends versus a face to face interaction. I believe that this shift to technological interactions will diminish our ability to communicate in a personal manner. While our country is moving towards more and more technologies that replace human interaction, our ability to verbally and emotionally communicate will be lost. Do you think that the blurred lines between reality and fantasy has raised a more emotional generation whose goals have become unrealistic as they try to achieve what is depicted in the media? Also do you think we successfully live in the “now” or has our culture started slip into living moments as a snapshot?
Television and social media has most certainly affected the way people view others, themselves, and the way that their life should work. Teenagers spend their weekends rushing through homework so that they can catch up on their favorite Netflix show in the quiet of their room instead of going outside or hanging with friends. Shows like Friends sets unrealistic goals that affect the way peers view each other. Friendships can be ruined because of the expectations one sets for another, as many don’t realize that just because it works in TV doesn’t mean it works in real life. Watching the perfect life that the characters lead most also affects the way viewers look at their own life. Questions like “am I as skinny or pretty as this character” or “are my clothes as cute as this other character” are raised, with many forgetting the hours of preparation before each scene with personal stylists in every category. This ties even into social media, as friends follow not only their friends, but celebrities, or sport players, or models. In today’s world, we are always looking at someone, whether it be TV or social media, who we view as better or more perfect than ourselves. The new generation has been affected by these blurred lines more than any other because the rise of television and social media has grown alongside the generation growing up. In regards to the second question, I believe that the “now” can be lived in but never fully frozen. I agree with one of Rushkoff’s quotes that states, “the more forcefully we attempt to stop the passage of time, the less available we are to the moment we seek to preserve.” Learning to live in the now involves having to let go of the past and the future, which is almost impossible for anyone. I believe that with the rise of new technologies, there will now always be an urge to take a picture in every moment and post it, so that we can sway the views our friends might have on our life. This ties back to the first question because, in posting a new picture, we alert people of a moment that is frozen, not of a movement that portrays the emotions that happened before or after the picture was taken. We can live in and freeze time for other viewers who look at us, but we cannot forget the way we lived the full sequence of actions that took place while the photo was being taken. The more we try and freeze the moment for ourselves, the more we miss out on the other events that happened and we start to lose the importance of living in the “now” at all.
The blurred lines between reality and fantasy have definitely raised a more emotional generation. Whether it be with relationships, jobs, or families, the goals set by people have become very unrealistic due to the way television and social media depict them. We watch shows and movies where young adults make millions and live a “perfect” life. We are confused by this image presented to us, and make a goal to one day live this very same way because we aren’t capable of generating the idea of our own “perfect” life.
We do not successfully live in the “now”. We lock in specific moments from the past, and fail to see later moments in life. An example of living in the moment are pictures. We post pictures all over the web, whether it be on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. These pictures are frozen memories, and since we feel so inclined to capture everything through pictures, these will soon be the only memories we have. Our generation can’t live in the “now” because that would mean we would have to forget about the past and the future. This can relate back to the first question and how we strive for a future like the ones depicted on the television.
I agree with your comment on the change in our communication skills, it is likely people are more comfortable with communicating over social media sites than a face to face interview. We have become a society where in person communication is more of a burden than a quick text or email being sent to the individual. Regarding the division between reality and fantasy, people have been affected by the references in the media, for the good and the bad. People are more aware in current events and the happenings of their community, however, are succumbed to the falsities and misconceptions portrayed in it. The generation raised with this high level of media influence has been exposed to the high standards in society, and the desire to “fit in”. I believe this generation is more emotional, for it is easier to compare oneself to another individual, for they are able to look at their posts on social media and compare their experiences to theirs, which can lead to alterations in identity. People are constantly searching for the approval of their characteristics or personality, and the media portrays the levels in which people are respected or disapproved of. Rushkoff mentions the effect the media has on our personality when he stated, “Technology allows for this dual life, this ability to live in two different places– as two very different people– a the same time.” (121-122), which reflects its effects it can have on the way a person lives their life. The two differences he mentions in this quotation are reflective of our identities we create for ourselves in a place where there is no face to face communication, compared to when we are in a situation where communication is imperative. I think our culture is not successfully living in the “now”, for we are too focused in the catching up on social media, which brings us out of the current situation into someone else’s life. We get distracted by current interactions between those around us, when we are focused on the social network we are missing out on. Rushkoff states, “They are reports from the periphery, of things that happened moments ago.” (74) as he reflects on the social media’s impact on living in the present. Society believes being up to date on current social aspects of the internet will allow them to be living in the present, however, the present does not live inside of a screen, it lies in one’s surrounding environment.