Columns

ON DA INTERWEBZ

“Technology” is a fairly far-reaching theme. Perhaps it’s just that I’m somewhat of a technophobe who shies away from things with buttons and flashing lights, but the sheer magnitude of what counts as technology is overwhelming. Needless to say, it was hard to pick what aspects of technology to focus on in this week’s issue. We look at whether cellphones are really killing us (page 18), debate whether social media is stunting our social skills (page 32), and also look further afield to the International Space Station (page 26).

The rise of social media has enabled us to talk about our personal problems with people who live on the other side of the globe, to share news faster than the mainstream media, to spread ideas like wildfire, and to stay up to date with issues that might otherwise have escaped us. Rebecca Black would never have infiltrated the world with such speed without the Internet, but conversely, Wikileaks - aka the crusade for free speech – also wouldn’t have happened. Furthermore, it’s only with social media and the Internet that the oft bandied-about term “global community” has really come into its own.

Ironically, despite being connected to the world more intimately and more aware of global goings-on than any generation before us, we are possibly the most apathetic and inactive generation of all. Rather than technology making us feel more empowered to do something about issues that affect us, the amount of information by which we’re now bombarded only serves to remind us of the vastness of the globe, and how ineffectual “our place in the world” really is. When you know that kids are rioting in Greece, it seems a bit silly to get up in arms about a local post office closing.
 
But maybe it’s not so much that we don’t care about things, but instead that we try to show that we care in a different way. We send emails instead of penned letters, we Skype rather than call, we “like” pictures on Facebook rather than sitting down with a photo album. Perhaps in the same way that technology has revolutionised personal relationships, it has set a new precedent for how social change is effected. On page 22, Josh Hercus discusses how social change has occurred in the past. But do the same rules apply for the future? Do protests and sit-ins have any effect in a time when so much of life is played out on the interwebz? Maybe “liking” a page on Facebook or engaging in keyboard warfare isn’t as active as refusing to give up your seat on the bus, but it’s certainly a start.

Hope you had a great start to the semester,

Julia Hollingsworth