5 ms·
I think it's a fallacy to presume this is generational. Thirty years ago, the previous generation of grumpy old farts had basically the same class of remarks to
by inopinatus 5y ago
I think it's a fallacy to presume this is generational. Thirty years ago, the previous generation of grumpy old farts had basically the same class of remarks to make about us, and our preferences, since a great many of one's peers were practically glued to that TV screen. Social media is designed to weaponise our dopamine/reward pathways; if you're a holdout against that, fine, but so are a ton of twentysomethings. My assessment is that responses to attention capture stimuli are individual, not generational, and the observable variations have more to do with technological change, than cultural or anthropological change.
More generally, making value judgements on the basis of media consumption is something to let go of, in my experience.
- randomsearch 5y agoThat’s odd, because your own reply explains why this is different (the weaponisation / manipulation). The technology is qualitatively different or “generational.” Growing up with it has given this generation a different experience and different behaviours.
- inopinatus 5y agoI never said it was different. Quite the opposite. I said that the behaviour is the same. The technology it attaches to is different, that’s all. Making a dispositional inference at all is the error. Or more bluntly, every generation complains about the next one, but most old farts don’t realise they’ve sleepwalked into the cliché.
- heyitsanewacco 5y agoI can recall pretty much every episode of the first 10 seasons of the Simpsons in ridiculous detail because I watched hours of TV after school in the 90s, and my parents lamented that I didn't go outside enough. This isn't new.