OK, Boomer
A few months ago, I was at a large gathering for the birthday of a friend with whom I had few mutuals. I ended up sitting further away from him, and conversation was both uninteresting and intermittent, so everyone started pulling out their phones to check their various messages and social media. I’m not particularly active on social media, so I continued reading my ebook. This happened every ten minutes or so as everyone checked their phones, and it wasn’t long before someone noticed I was reading. To my dismay, the conversation turned into a discussion of the book I was reading, and then consternation that I was reading at the dinner table.
I don’t disagree that reading at the dinner table is rude: it indicates a lack of respect for the food and a lack of interest in the companions seated there. However, in a situation where everyone is also on their phones, I found the hypocrisy startling, until I thought about it. There were two premises I didn’t consider: firstly, social media was important and time sensitive, and secondly, reading was something that took a single-minded concentration. It’s both of these predicates that caused the upset at the table, and though I acknowledged reading at the dinner table inappropriate, I still found it hilariously unfair when they went back to their phones.
Another phenomenon that was recently named is “sludge content”, which refers to the sort of automatically generated video clips which originated on TikTok, but are now circulating across various social media platforms which involve two or more clips simultaneously playing, Normally, one is the primary content, which contains a clip of something that viewers would ordinarily find interesting, and then alongside it, are clips that seem pointless: poorly done craftwork or video game gameplay. I had originally thought that the purpose of playing two videos at once was to circumvent copyright bots that would automatically remove copyrighted material, but be confused by something like that. It turns out that the purpose of sludge videos is to attract and retain overstimulated minds.
Social media algorithms have always favoured material that generates engagement: more clicks, more taps, more viewtime. This causes these videos to create a positive reinforcement loop, where they generate more engagement because the iPad kids and longtime users of the platform like the constant overstimulation, which cause them to be shown to people who might not be as used to the content style, but like one of the videos. Eventually however, these folks will become accustomed to two video clips being played at once, resulting in a dependence on this sort of overstimulation. They will continually seek it out to the point where this kind of content becomes the norm, and the gross majority of the population have rapidly diminishing attention spans.
Though sludge content is a new phenomenon, technology has been trending in direction for a long time; applications and algorithms attempting to maximize the amount of time that the user spends with them. Using colours that light certain triggers and sounds that satisfy, increasing user engagement increases ad revenue as well. At this point, it’s too early to determine the impact of digital proliferation on human growth and psychology, and the data from what small studies I have seen seem inconclusive. The rise of the term “iPad kid” showcases the disdain older adults have for those with what seems to be technology induced ADHD, but the jury is still out on whether it is strictly negative. Perhaps social norms will change to favour those who can’t sustain a conversation for more than a few minutes. Will that disadvantage those who can, or put them in a superior situation, becoming savants of sorts?
If I were a parent today, this would be a hard decision for me to make. On one hand, I strongly feel like the degradation of attention span and the loss of ability to be comfortable without constant audiovisual stimulation is strictly negative, but that could also just be my boomer sensibilities speaking. Likewise, although the jury is still out on whether this sort of ability to multitask be a good thing, it seems that being able to interpret and understand rapidly changing information streams is important for the future. But though I lean towards the belief that the loss in attention span isn’t worth it, it’s perhaps safer to go with the flow: in the future, society will likely cater to those with limited attention spans and a dependance on electronics. Though it’s possible that someone who is atypically analogue will become a leader, it is perhaps more likely that they become social pariahs, Luddites unable to cope in a technocratic society. Only time will tell, and hopefully by the time I have kids, time will have told.
This sort of behaviour exists on a spectrum, and I have no doubt that I’m closer to the more traditional end of the spectrum compared to my age group, where I’m capable of reading books and watching movies. I believe in the sanctity of my mind, in the importance of letting thoughts drift aimlessly once in a while. Without that time, I have a hard time processing emotions and deconstructing the events of the day. It is with this reflection that some of my best ideas arrive, and I become at peace with things that have happened throughout the day.
Perhaps I’m a relic of the past, whose hobbies are soon to be rendered irrelevant by technology. But I look to the seat in front of me today and see a child who looks no older than twelve holding an e-reader, and working their way through it intently. Perhaps reading isn’t dead after all. Perhaps it’s possible for TikTok and books to have a peaceful coexistence. I, too, find myself turning to my phone after a long day, a busy meeting, or a stressful dinner. The familiarity of my glowing screen provides solace in times of need, even if it just acts as a panacea for a slight bout of anxiety or anger.
Still, the proliferation of technology, and how people have accepted it into their lives without much consideration of its implications is annoying to me. Not only because I refuse to let it dictate my life, to be present and responsive to anyone and everyone whenever required, but also because of how rapidly it’s become the norm. I’m now the strange one who reads, who doesn’t have data, who staunchly refuses to share my information with various companies and services. But as in the situation with children, perhaps it’s best to stick with the crowd, to succumb in order to avoid ostracization. However, if there is a hill I’ll chose to die on, it’s this one, the one of thinking slow and moving slow. If giving up reading, writing, and moviegoing is what it takes to fit in, then perhaps I don’t want it. I’m content with being a boomer.
