Humanity and Technology

       To say that there is a complex relationship between humans and technology is an understatement. The good which technology has done society is undeniable; from advances in modern medicine to increased convenience of every day life. Technology has always been the gasoline which fueled change in society throughout history. However, technology is not without its adverse effects.

      Has science gone too far? The question has turned into more of a joke than a serious inquiry but I believe it is a question worth considering. Technology has the potential to create the futuristic utopian society which we see in television shows like The Jetsons. It also has the potential to create a dystopian future. Unless a nuclear war occurs, I do not believe that either of these will be the case.

      Speculation of the future of technology is something I would consider entirely useless. There is no point to weighing the pros and cons of technologies which have yet to exist. However, I believe it is extremely beneficial to weigh the pros and cons of technologies which do already exist. The two technologies which I would like to discuss are the internet and the smartphone. 

        The internet is a creation which has yielded tremendous benefits and drawbacks. It has provided tremendous help to both big and small businesses, it has made shopping more convenient, it has allowed people from all over the world to stay in contact with each other and so much more. However, the internet has also contributed to a large number of problems as well. For one, the pornography industry has grown exponentially since the internet came to be. It only took six yers after video-streaming's normalization for adult entertainment to become the number one streamed category. Pornography addictions have skyrocketed since. Along with the growth of the adult entertainment industry, the sex trafficking industry has boomed. However, while sex trafficking is an awful and despicable, it is unlikely that anyone in this class will be directly affected by it. So, are there negatives of the internet which almost certainly affect every single person in this class, and university as a whole? 

  

        Once the laptop became mainstream, social media as we know it took off not long after, with the 2005 launching of Facebook. Social media has only grown since the adoption of the smartphone. Social media, and smartphones in general, are both inventions which have had massive impacts on society. With 3.6 billion social media users in the world and over 85% of Americans owning a smartphone, it is likely that nearly everyone you know has both of these technologies. So, how has this affected the world?

       To start, the average person spends 5-6 hours on their smartphone a day. Not only this, but this figure does NOT include work-related smartphone usage. The average person also spends 147 minutes on social media a day, just under two and a half hours. This means, firstly, that half of the average person's time spent on their phone is spent using social media. Secondly, it means that people are spending around 25% of any given day on their phone. Combine that with the eight hours of sleep that someone should be getting, and there is only about 10 hours a day which the average person does NOT spend on their phone. 

       However, more affected than anyone else by both smartphones and social media, is Generation Z. Gen Z is the only generation to date that has grown up surrounded by both of the technologies in question. On average, Gen Z spends 7.6 hours on their phones a day. This fact, coupled with a study by the National Institute of Health, is jarring. The study says that children who were exposed to more than two hours of screen time a day scored lower on language and thinking tests. Additionally, children who spent more than seven hours on screens showed a thinning of the brain's cortex, which is responsible for critical thinking and reasoning. 

 

 

        Equally concerning is the link which has been found between smartphone usage and depression. A separate study by the NIH concluded that  "The positive correlation between smartphone addiction and depression is alarming. Reasonable usage of smart phones is advised, especially among younger adults and less educated users who could be at higher risk of depression." 

       Keeping this information in mind, let's transition over to the mental health studies done on Generation Z. Generation Z, according to an article in MedicalNewsToday, "Members of Generation Z report higher rates of depression and a number of other mental health conditions than do generations before them." To be precise, over 70% of Gen Z members polled reported symptoms of depression during the Covid-19 pandemic. In addition to this, Generation Z is the most stressed out generation in the United States. There's no way that that information is correct, right? Wrong. A study by the American Psychological Association (APA) found that Gen Z is indeed the most stressed out generation in America. So, summed up in a single sentence, Generation Z is the most depressed, most anxious, and most stressed generation in America today. 

        What is the result of this? From 2007 to 2017, the suicide rate of individuals between 10-24 has rose 56%. Suicide is the second leading cause of death for Gen Z. So, let's review one more time. Gen Z is more anxious, more depressed, more stressed, and more of a danger to themselves than any other generation in American history.

         While I am not saying that smartphones and social media are the sole cause of these factors, I would like to present a question. What is so different about the world that Gen Z grew up in compared to the world that other generations grew up in? War, famine, sickness, climate change; it all existed for every other generation as well. The only major difference I can think of in the world that Gen Z grew up in compared to the world other generations grew up in is smartphones and social media. 

         In addition to this, a study at UNC states that smartphones affect the way users think, their sleep patterns, their behavior, and impairs their social and emotional skills. Additionally, every tap we make on our phone screen and every notification we receive releases dopamine into our brains. Dopamine is the neurotransmitter which our brain uses to reward us for things we do that help us to survive. There are relatively few natural things which cause our brain to produce dopamine. Sleep, exercise, eating, hydrating, and sex account for most of the natural dopamine which is released in a person's brain. Dopamine is also released by things such as nicotine, drugs, and alcohol also release dopamine. This is exactly what gives these substances their addictive nature. Considering that smartphones release dopamine with each tap and notification, the average member of Gen Z spends 7.6 hours a day releasing dopamine into their brains. 

        On a neurochemical level, one of the major aspects of depression is a lack of dopamine production from the brain. Often times, what causes this is an influx in artificial dopamine production. The brain can become overwhelmed when dealing with an influx of artificially-gained dopamine releases. When these artificial releases are consistent, the brain learns to naturally produce less dopamine, so as to not get overwhelmed. This means that when the individual is not constantly using an artificial source of dopamine, they begin to feel depressed. Gen Z has grown up with the holy grail of artificial dopamine: smartphones. We can spend 7.6 hours a day feeding ourselves dopamine with little no societal consequence. 

        Now, let's return to the question at the beginning of this blog; the relationship between humanity and technology. I would put forth that technology is a great thing, and so is the internet. However, smartphones, without a doubt, cause more harm than good. I do not know the solution. The banning of smartphones seems over the top, but the more I consider the effects that smartphones have had, maybe it's not so extreme after-all. Regardless, I believe something must be done about the harmful ways which smartphones are affecting society, especially Generation Z.

Propaganda

        When people hear the word "propaganda," they often think of World War II. They think of the propaganda which Adolf Hitler used to stay in power,  and they think of the Uncle Sam posters all around the United States which encouraged citizens to enlist in the military. However, propaganda is political tactic that has been used almost all throughout human history.

        The first recorded propaganda dates back as early as 480 BC when a Greek commander named Themistocles used propaganda to lure another warrior into a naval battle. Some sources list the first propaganda even earlier, stating that Darius I of Persia used propaganda to rise to power in 515 BC.

       As a matter of fact, we are surrounded by propaganda all the time. Propaganda, according to the Oxford dictionary, is "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view." 

      Truthfully, American mainstream media is closer to propaganda nowadays than true journalism. The media consolidation which has plagued the country has left the media in the hands of a handful or organizations which for the most part share similar goals. 

      Additionally, propaganda and advertisement are one and the same. The term propaganda has gained a negative stigma overtime, but it is not a negative concept in and of itself. It more so depends on who is releasing the propaganda, and what they are hoping to persuade people to believe. In my own estimation, governmental propaganda is almost always dangerous. The government should never play a role in what its citizens believe. Uncle Sam, while being for a good cause, was still a form of government propaganda which led to Americans signing up to risk their lives. This was for a great cause, as it helped to stop a dictator from committing mass genocide of the Jewish people. It is one of the extremely rare examples of unproblematic government propaganda. 

       Overall, I believe that we need to avoid viewing the word propaganda in a negative way, and should instead recognize that we are constantly surrounded by it. It is the job of the individual citizen to recognize propaganda, and determine if it is propaganda that promotes something that is wrong. 

The Age of AI

       The Age of AI documentary by Frontline PBS was one of the most eye-opening and terrifying documentaries which I have ever seen. The documentary covers the age of technology which we live in, and shows just how harmful it can be. While I am already distrusting of the government and big tech, the content of this documentary shocked me.

        The scariest part of the documentary in my opinion was by far the way that AI and advanced tech is being used in China. During one part of the documentary, it says that AI may be an even greater tool for authoritarian governments than democratic ones. It showed footage of the 24/7 surveillance of citizens in certain cities, complete with facial recognitions and profiles. People who speak poorly of the government are punished, and could be placed on a red flag list if they are even suspected of not being supportive of the government. 

       In the United States, this issue is not that dire. Or, if it is, we do not yet know it. Whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden certainly planted a seed of doubt in the mind of many Americans. Snowden released highly classified documents which detailed the fact that the government was using highly illegal wiretaps to listen in on the phone conversations of ordinary Americans. He was immediately deemed a security threat by the American government and we was forced to seek political asylum in Russia, where resides to this day. 

        This story begs the question, what else is the US government doing with technology that the ordinary citizen does not know about? We already witnessed the horrifying reality which many Chinese citizens face; would it be possible for our government to do the same thing?

      It is very possible to use this surveillance technology in a manner which helps Americans, however. This type of technology is used to vet people flying in airports, as well as people in attendance during the president's speeches. If there is a perceived threat in the crowd, it is dealt with. However, despite this, I believe that this type of surveillance is an extremely slippery slope which we cannot afford to slip down. 

Media Consolidation

       I have already spent a decent amount of time discussing the concept of media consolidation in my blogs. To review, media consolidation is the concept of major media sources becoming controlled by less and less organizations or companies. Currently, all mainstream media sources in the United States are controlled by six companies. Yes, only six. 

     This may or may not seem like a problem, however, I assure you that it is. For one, there are less perspectives offered when the media is controlled by less groups. Most of the mainstream media in the United States all share similar perspectives, and it is not one which is reflected by the average American. The voices in the media advocate strongly for heavy American intervention in the conflict in Ukraine. However, the vast majority of Americans say we are giving just the right amount of support, or giving too much. 

      Businesses tend to be more supportive of war due to the benefits to the economy, which benefit the profits of the business. This is likely a large reason for the strong pro-war voices that we constantly hear in the media. This is one of the problems with media consolidation. 

      It is no secret that the media is less trusted than ever in the United States. Americans were already losing trust in the media, but it increased drastically in the US during former President Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. While Trump remains one of the most controversial figure in America, I believe that his callouts of the American mainstream media were a beneficial thing for the American populace. As someone who believes that all authority deserves to be questioned, it is extremely important that we make sure that the news we receive is reliable. 

      As recently as 1983, US media was owned by 50 companies. The media consolidation in the United States has been rapid, and equally rapid has been the increase in distrust of the media. If there are any doubts that the businesses who own media interfere with the media coverage of events, then this video should put them to rest.

       As you can see, hundreds of news crews are all saying the same thing word for word. These clips were taken from news stations at local, regional, and national levels. The media should NEVER become this uniform. It is truly terrifying to see something such as this, as it shows just how controlled our media is. I worry that freedom of the press if becoming more of a myth than a true right of the United States.

      Despite all of this, I always hesitate to encourage government interference, especially in the media. However, the only solution that I can think of is to set some kind of government regulation on the amount of media sources which any given company or organization can own. Media consolidation is slowly tearing this country apart, and I believe that it is a problem that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. A free press is the foundation of the United States, and it must be protected like the sacred right that it is. 

Digital Footprints

       Prior to this class, I had never taken much time to consider just how much data is collected about people from their presence online. I had never considered the amount of information that can truly be processed through a web search or a simple question asked to Siri or Alexa. Between watching a few TED talks and the Age of AI documentary (which I'll talk about in a separate post), I was honestly pretty startled.

       Among the most startling of these realizations, is the fact that a vast majority of phone calls are recorded, and could potentially be listened to by anyone. I have spent a great deal of time considering how the age of AI could impact the future. One of the biggest things I think it will cause is a multitude of scandals for public figures. To be blunt, 30 years from now, if the worst thing that comes out about a Presidential candidate is a video of him doing cocaine in a fraternity bathroom, he is likely a pretty clean character. 

      Not only this, but there is a multitude of privacy invasions which occur on the level of an ordinary citizen as well. "Revenge porn" has become an increasingly common problem. Revenge porn is the term for when a relationship ends, and one member of the relationship releases private content, whether texts or pictures, to the public. This is done out of spite in order to shame and humiliate the other member of the relationship.

     I have talked in my past blogs about the way that I view the internet and about how it does more harm than good at this point in time. All of these things that I am discussing in this article is just another tidbit of supporting evidence. People are welcoming invasions of their own privacy because they are often blissfully unaware it is even happening. Surveillance technology is coming with them into their homes, their bedrooms, their bathrooms. It is a startling truth that the government, or a big tech company, or anyone, could potentially have access to the most private aspects of our lives. 

Diffusion Theory

     Diffusion of innovation is a theory that seeks to explain how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread. It was a theory formed by Everett Rogers, a professor at the University of New Mexico. In this theory, he used a chart explain the audience of adopters. The chart is shown below. 

        Each of these sections reflects the amount of people in the general public who adopt a new idea or technology. At the very beginning are the innovators who adopt an idea or technology during its "launch" phase. After this, the early adopters, who adopt during the "uptake" phase. Then, the early majority adopts during the "normalization" stage. Next, the late majority adopts during the "maturation" phase. Finally, the laggards adopt it during the "saturation" phase. It is important to note that though the percentages on the graph add up to 100%, 100% of people almost never adopt ideas or technologies. There will always be people who refuse to buy in. For example, only 96.7% of American families owned a TV as of 2011, despite the fact that I have never personally met someone without a TV. 

        One of the most recent technological advancements that can be used to demonstrate the Diffusion of Innovations Theory is the smart phone. Below is a graph of PEW research polls for the percentage of Americans which own both cell phones and smart phones, with the blue line being cellphones and the light green being smartphones. 

     Though the first smartphone was technically made available for purchase in 1994 (which shocked me) PEW did not start doing research into their ownership until about 2011, where an estimated 35% of Americans owned smartphones. This would put them roughly in the middle of the early adopters phase. This means that it took about 17 years for smartphones to grow from their conception to halfway through the early adopters phase. They reached late adopters phase just two years later in 2013 when research suggested that just over 50% of Americans now had smart phones. As of Feb. 8, 2021, 85% of Americans now owned smartphones. This shows the rapid adoption which occurs as a technology reaches the normalization stage. 

      I would say that the Diffusion of Innovation theory is an accurate model, however I am not convinced that it is a good or bad thing. I believe that it is simply just an accurate model for predicting the rate at which an idea is adopted.

History of the Television

       The television has had a much larger impact on American society than I had previously ever considered. Prior to the television, the majority of Americans received their news from the radio, they were unable to watch sporting events unless they were attending in person, and entertainment was an entirely different industry in general. 

        The television was invented in 1927. Television also had a large impact on politics after its conception. FDR became the first president to appear on television in 1939. FDR had polio and was confound to a wheel chair for the majority of his time as President. Considering he was elected largely off of speeches given on the radio, his election has become a subject of conjecture of political historians, who wonder if FDR would have been elected if Americans had been more aware of his condition. 

        Not only FDR, but in 1960 the first televised presidential debate took place between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy. Polls found that there was a much higher support for Kennedy among people who watched the debate than those who listened to it. Political commentators and political historians agree that this was likely due to the fact that JFK was an unusually attractive man. It's well documented in psychology that there is a bias towards attractive people, as people tend to find them more agreeable and easier to get along with. This now meant that the image and appearance of the president was important, not just his politics.  

       Aside from politics, television is still the primary source of entertainment for Americans. Americans have grown to idolize celebrities that they see on their televisions, from athletes to actors and more. Given that the worldwide entertainment industry grew to be worth an estimated 101 billion dollars prior to Covid-19, the invention of the television catapulted one of the largest industries in the world into prominence.