This blog post is prompted by Clay Shirky’s argument at our 10th Annual Symposium. In his keynote speech, Shirky addressed the fast technical advancement we are experiencing globally and argued that these speedy technical changes are “causing cultural changes.” His thought-provoking point has stayed with me because I think that this cause and effect relationship deserves some untangling.
Doubtless that, as Shirky showed in his speech, as well as in his book, Here Comes Everybody, the increased access to the public fora of the internet has led to increased awareness of a vox populi able to perform organized action and carry out successful grassroots movements. The internet and sites like Facebook or Meetup has also contributed to a dramatic re-definition of the personal and the private by making public information hitherto perceived off-limits. Yet, do these changes amount to “cultural changes” indeed? Does the unprecedented flow of information via technical innovations affect our moral and ethical values, causing a profound shift in cultural norms, or does it lead “only” to changes in the way we continue to perform these values, adding speed and efficiency perhaps, without altering the basic structures of our various cultures? And shouldn’t we argue that, instead of having a unidirectional relationship between technical changes and cultural changes, these changes are mutually influential, meaning that given cultural norms also determine how technical innovations are being put to use in a given cultural context? Yes, there is a universalizing, levelling and westernizing effect that reaches across the globe affecting those with access to the internet while leaving what I assume is still the larger part of the world’s population relatively immune to such changes. And then we again end up with a rather elite western notion of things going our way without really bothering to note that while we do have a large share in the monopoly over the information highways, there are still many sideroads that remain unaffected by us.
“We know that technology changes our lives — but could it be changing our selves as well?” Sherry Turkle, Diane L. Coutu. “Technology and Human Vulnerability,” Harvard Business Review September 2003 (2003). R0309B.
My answer is an unequivocal yes. There is a yin and a yang to the developments that Shirky and others have described. It seems clear to me that not enough people are paying attention to the two sides of the same coin.
Facebook’s romp with privacy settings in the larger context of social networks is a current, significant, and very relevant example.
I refer you to two things.
“Year 2029: Machines claim to be conscious. These claims are largely accepted.” Ray Kurzweil, The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence (Penguin Books, 2000).
Drogan, J. (2010, April 29). Preparatory Note for the Tenth Annual Symposium on Communications and Communications-Intensive Instruction. Westport CT. Retrieved from http://jmsdrgn.squarespace.com/storage/Preparatory%20Note%20for%20the%20Tenth%20Annual%20Symposium%20on%20Communications%20and%20Communications-Intensive%20Instruction.pdf
Jim
One more pointer.
Is the Internet making us stupid? http://www.smartplanet.com/technology/blog/thinking-tech/is-the-internet-making-us-stupid/4039/
Jim
Szidonia, you’re so right- down with technological determinism! I was reminded of your post when I saw this week’s Time magazine cover story: “Facebook… and how it’s redefining privacy.” The article (which is full of innocuous observations like “don’t badmouth your boss on Facebook!!”) doesn’t even scratch the surface of the questions you raise here. The fallacy of its headline is just what you point out: “Facebook redefines privacy” makes a computer program the agent rather than the medium of cultural change.