Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid

Social media has stunted even adults' ability to interact with strangers in face-to-face situations.

It pisses me off to no end that a couple friends of mine -- in their 50s no less -- will go to the bar to hang out and spend time on their phone scrolling social when the whole fucking point of going to the bar is to be social. I end up abandoning them more times than not just because I leave the damn house to talk to other people, not to sit with others on their phones. And yes, I call them out for it, but they tend to laugh it off.

 

I'd actually agree that it's not entirely profound, provided one is kind of where Haidt is, or capable of looking from Haidt's vantage point back toward the world he's critiquing.

What makes the piece different is that it isn't fixated on calling the extreme right (or left) the problem, or relying on the "it's human nature" line. It chooses to indict specific things and suggests progressives might have real action to take in creating solutions.

 

And why did he "barely campaign?" Because his handlers were afraid the more he said, the more likely he'd screw up.

And Hillary was the same, with a slightly different twist. We just didn't want her speaking, for fear she'd turn people away.

Ladies and gentlemen, your past two presidential candidates.

 

I must be reading it wrong because I think that Haidt spent more than 8,000 words to say that social media gives trolls an anonymous platform to stir division and that kids need to play outside.

His comparison of social media to the Tower of Babel is, to use the vocabulary word of the week, not all that “unique.”

I know that it’s pretty much the prevailing writing style of The Atlantic to drive the bus around the block more that a few times before finally attempting to park it in the barn, but I think that the reaction to the essay, at least here, seems to create more division than clarity.

 

I imagine it would be divisive. It challenges progressive orthodoxy in equal measure to conservative nutjobbery. That alone would make it offensive. The piece does not have a long, detailed paragraph that doubles as a disclaimer that, of course, the right is far worse and it ends on the idea that the helicopter parenting preferred by wealthy, socially-connected people is infantilizing children in a bad way. It’s all written very nicely and thoughtfully, but the piece is not for, nor written to, Trump voters.

 

Sounds like the tug o war during Battle of the Network Stars.

 

It’s odd somebody can read a lengthy piece about the negative effects of algorithmic-driven social media and come up with any Hot Take other than “delete the algorithms.”

 

That presumes the supply side resolves everything. There's a demand side. The algorithms exist for a reason - because they work, and they help make money. They work because people inherently want to be a part of something, a community, a group, and in a society where we've chosen to relentlessly shit upon our institutions, people will settle, and have settled, for what social media offers.

 

And what has helped the relentless shitting upon institutions and experts? Algorithms that feed upon confirmation bias and driving engagement via angry responses.

 

All your algorithms are belong to us.​

 

Maybe our institutions suck.