To me social networking seems like the least social activity somebody could do. Then again, I may be one of the last few members of Generation Y (anybody born between 1980-1997) that is not on Myspace or Facebook.
My reasons for resisting the temptation to build a personal shrine for others to see are based solidly upon hypocrisy and, though I struggle to admit it, sanctimonious illusions disguised as disingenuous ideals.
The whole concept of keeping a Web site that chronicles your favorite books, music, drinking habits and political and sexual leanings is stupid for more reasons than worth listing here. However, like most innovations, there are enormous opportunities for humanity to communicate with each other within these sites.
I will admit that I know how to navigate both Myspace and Facebook, and often do. My buddy from college has a login that I still remember. So yes, there’s the hypocrisy. Also, the truth is I like using the sites to see who is getting married or who has drifted apart and all that shit. A friend who is currently living in Japan regularly posts pictures on Facebook that I check to keep myself up to date on why my life sucks.
But I like telling people that I am not a member of either site. Why? Well, I am not sure. A girl I work with once told me that, “Not being on Facebook doesn’t make you a person people think of as quirky or intellectually superior…it makes people think nobody is thinking about you at all.” I had to laugh because I THINK, judging by the three separate uses of the word THINK in her ridiculous explanation, that she was serious. I told her I was perfectly fine with not having anybody thinking about me. When I said I also don’t have cable television her eyes widened and she changed the topic.
Later, though, I felt I may have come off as extremely haughty, like I was trying to portray an idealized version of myself -- the man who reads Chaucer, listens to Chopin and refuses blow jobs. I can assure you I’ve never done any of these things. I do, however, have an extreme aversion to the stupidity on television. Yes, Sportscenter and the Daily Show are excellent but try watching anything else. Fear Factor, Deal or No Deal, Dateline, The Biggest Loser and so many others are made solely for the resting retard within us all. And those popular programs are examples from just one network (NBC).
In a new book by Mark Bauerlein called “The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes our Future (Or don’t trust anyone under the age of 30), ” the author suggests that Generation Y will basically bring an end to the world because of our lack of understanding of history. Obviously, we have our shortcomings but the book is ridiculous on a number of levels. I fundamentally disagree that our generation (at least in totality), which Bauerlein dubs the dumbest, is less educated than my Grandpa’s, which Tom Brokaw and many others have called the greatest. There’s just no way, if the ages are compared by any logical barometer (literacy rate, % of college degrees, even IQ tests to name a few).
Also, it’s tough to believe that Mr. Bauerlein’s own generation is not to blame for our so-called stupidity. Last time I checked adults ran institutions of higher education and implemented the criteria for what students are forced to learn. Bauerlein, himself, is a professor of English at Emory University.
But, yes, it is scary to see surveys that show up to a quarter of Gen Y’ers can’t name the vice president or one member of the Supreme Court. So does this mean we will bring about an end to civilization as we know it, though? Almost surely not.
And I’d argue that more young people are involved today in issues ranging from global warming to electing the president (See Barack Obama’s base) than ever before.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/26/education/26green.html?scp=2&sq=seed+house&st=nyt
There is reason to believe that social networking can lead down an anti-social road when someone has 167 online friends and no human friends. Or if wikipedia and google are constantly being used as substitutes for memorization, red flags should fly. And finally without question "Dancing with the Stars" makes dumb people dumber.
However, innovations like the Internet or the I-pod, which Bauerlein blames for distracting our youthful minds, are not the causation for society’s declining intellect – if it is, in fact, in decline.
Bauerlein’s points are trite and his conclusions reek of the same ambiguous odors that past generations tried to place upon his generation. For whatever reason, the old finds it their inherent rite to give up on and look down upon the young. The cycle will almost surely continue.
It’s tough to argue against the fact that reading more Rousseau and watching less MTV would be beneficial for society, but it’s even more difficult to allow Mr. Bauerlein to get away with all of his conclusions scot-free.
