In a scenario where complacency has reigned for far too long, gluing your ass in your office chair and hollering with your fingers is aiding and abetting. The Machine is only far too happy to have provided you with the Time Wasters to lull you into a false sense of involvement. It has convinced you that blogging, and posting, and LIKEing, and TWEETing actually does shit. It is classical conditioning. You peck at some keys, other monkeys hollar back and you think shit is changing.
Nope. Nothing is changing, It is just a distraction. It's just Interactive TEEVEE. It's the shiny, glowing orb dangled in front of you by the Angler Fish of Ennui. Reeling you in and snapping its jaws tight.
Today is no different than yesterday. You need to pound pavement. You need to face to face. You need to scream and spittle at your opposition. You need to do Hands On change.
Otherwise, you are still going to be ever getting Fucking Nowhere.
But at least you have your Candy Crush right?
The classic response to new tech, and the way people interface with it, is a sort of "hold your nose" cynicism which I think misses the point.
Sure, hitting LIKE produces no tangible change in the world except another few bits tossed into the marketing file which predicts your individual tastes and pressure points. But it has been shown that people who LIKE a cause are more likely to donate real money to it. Facebook activism, for all its bullshit, does actually raise awareness about real issues, which is the first step of effective activism.
I remember people telling me, as a kid, that the friends I make on the net aren't real friends. That all of this is a sinful indulgence, a whole microcosm of sound and fury --signifying nothing. And have I watched for years as these same adults have grown increasingly dismissive of the world, more callous and set in their ways, more nostalgic, more out of touch.
Things are different now. If twitter wasn't an effective tool for distributing info and organizing people, then Egypt wouldn't have shut it down during arab spring. The San Francisco BART system wouldn't have turned off cell communications to thwart the Anon protest in 2011 (http://www.infoworld.com/t/cringely/bart-vs-anonymous-dumb-and-dumber-170087). Yes, we waste an incomprehensible amount of time, but any technology of value is always double edged sword.
If you think the Internet is basically the same thing as television, you do not understand the Internet. If you think blogging is just a "false sense of involvement", then why has it radically transformed the structure of journalism? Regular people have more options at their fingertips today than they had throughout the history of mankind. Many of those options are not effective, but that's not what matters, right?
Warren Ellis cuts to the point:
http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=9270
I think I probably overstated because I was in a jaded/grumpy mood this morning. I don't think the internet has been completely useless, but I think it has bred some complacency and "push button advocacy" that I think can act like a weight on progress. I think the petitions on the White House website are a perfect example. Those things probably get as much attention as the comment cards at McDonald's.
I think you still need literal boots on the ground to really get things done. At least, that has been my experience. The marijuana bill here would not have been defeated if all we had done was e-mail stuff to legislators and get people to post stuff. We had to Show Up to take that thing down.
Quote from: Cramulus on August 08, 2013, 04:43:54 PM
The classic response to new tech, and the way people interface with it, is a sort of "hold your nose" cynicism which I think misses the point.
Sure, hitting LIKE produces no tangible change in the world except another few bits tossed into the marketing file which predicts your individual tastes and pressure points. But it has been shown that people who LIKE a cause are more likely to donate real money to it. Facebook activism, for all its bullshit, does actually raise awareness about real issues, which is the first step of effective activism.
I remember people telling me, as a kid, that the friends I make on the net aren't real friends. That all of this is a sinful indulgence, a whole microcosm of sound and fury --signifying nothing. And have I watched for years as these same adults have grown increasingly dismissive of the world, more callous and set in their ways, more nostalgic, more out of touch.
Things are different now. If twitter wasn't an effective tool for distributing info and organizing people, then Egypt wouldn't have shut it down during arab spring. The San Francisco BART system wouldn't have turned off cell communications to thwart the Anon protest in 2011 (http://www.infoworld.com/t/cringely/bart-vs-anonymous-dumb-and-dumber-170087). Yes, we waste an incomprehensible amount of time, but any technology of value is always double edged sword.
If you think the Internet is basically the same thing as television, you do not understand the Internet. If you think blogging is just a "false sense of involvement", then why has it radically transformed the structure of journalism? Regular people have more options at their fingertips today than they had throughout the history of mankind. Many of those options are not effective, but that's not what matters, right?
Warren Ellis cuts to the point:
http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=9270
I have to say that the internet DOES have
portions that are basically television, but to say that the internet
as a whole is the same as television IS false.
Reminds me of how, according to some research, the literacy rate in the US is falling, because they refuse to consider content read online as "reading".
When you include online reading, though, the literacy rate is soaring. :lulz:
All those people who are engaging in "mere" push-button activism --- what were they doing before the net? still nothing. And lots of people who were doing nothing now have soapboxes and blogs and meetups and they're in the mix. So I have no problem with this "surface" level activism. If anything, it lets the actual movers and shakers know that they're not alone.
You can research and learn what you WANT to research and learn on the internet.
Some people aren't happy about that. :lol:
Eh, maybe I'm wrong and I'm just old-fashioned and out-dated.
He says typing on his iPad on the internet instead of doing his job to save the world.
Quote from: Cramulus on August 08, 2013, 07:15:10 PM
All those people who are engaging in "mere" push-button activism --- what were they doing before the net? still nothing. And lots of people who were doing nothing now have soapboxes and blogs and meetups and they're in the mix. So I have no problem with this "surface" level activism. If anything, it lets the actual movers and shakers know that they're not alone.
This. Imagine Ignatius T. Reilly's blog.
Quote from: Cramulus on August 08, 2013, 07:15:10 PM
All those people who are engaging in "mere" push-button activism --- what were they doing before the net? still nothing. And lots of people who were doing nothing now have soapboxes and blogs and meetups and they're in the mix. So I have no problem with this "surface" level activism. If anything, it lets the actual movers and shakers know that they're not alone.
I think the push button activism is worse than nothing. But that's just an opinion.
Push button activism is worse than nothing if youre satisfied that youve done something other than participated in some form of public opinion poll. Its valuable if it makes you want to get more involved.
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 11:37:16 PM
Push button activism is worse than nothing if youre satisfied that youve done something other than participated in some form of public opinion poll. Its valuable if it makes you want to get more involved.
Nail/head.
Quote from: Waffleman on August 08, 2013, 09:34:58 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on August 08, 2013, 07:15:10 PM
All those people who are engaging in "mere" push-button activism --- what were they doing before the net? still nothing. And lots of people who were doing nothing now have soapboxes and blogs and meetups and they're in the mix. So I have no problem with this "surface" level activism. If anything, it lets the actual movers and shakers know that they're not alone.
This. Imagine Ignatius T. Reilly's blog.
:fap: