In his article How Evil Is Tech?
David Brooks discusses the negative aspects of technology and lists reasons as to why there has been a shift in the employee's preference to work in the technology industry. The primary argument is that the tech industry has been categorized with industries like the tobacco industry which depends on people's addictions to make profits. Nonetheless, he advises that tech companies have the option to become more socially responsible.
Social Exclusion and Addiction
According to Brooks, as evidence shows from various researches, Silicon Valley plays a significant role in the destruction of young people because it fosters social exclusion. Secondly, he argues that the addiction caused by tech industries is on purpose for the benefit of increased profits as they use hijacking techniques to create dopamine surges. Lastly, most of the big tech companies are monopolies that impose their unfair conditions on smaller organizations and content creators as well as invading the lives of their users.
The Purpose of Tech Companies
The primary purpose of the article is to highlight the mistakes by big tech companies who instead of claiming to offer grit and glam in everyday life should provide efficiency to make people's lives easier. The article by Brooks fails to recognize the mistakes the users make with technology and hauls all the blame on big tech companies.
Limited and Partial Evidence
The article achieves its purpose to criticize tech companies with the use of appropriate evidence to support claims. However, the evidence is too limited and trivial. Brooks gives an example of research by Jean Twenge that suggests that with the increased use of recent technologies, teenagers are less likely to socialize. He also indicates that children in eighth grade who spend more than ten percent of their time on their Smartphone have been reported to be less unhappy than their counterparts who don't spend as much time. However, the data Brooks provides is partial because data also shows that today's teens are even more happy and healthy than their parents when they were teenagers. Teenagers today are less likely to be involved in destructive habits such as binge drinking, unprotected sex, and cigarette smoking when compared to teenagers 20 years ago. Hence, teenagers in modern times have changed their social behavior, and when compared to 20 years ago it is less harmful and healthier. Thus, Brooks should have highlighted all the aspects of his claims and not use partial evidence to push his agenda.
Dopamine Surges and Social Media Challenges
Brooks also highlights that tech companies feed the dopamine surges of social media user's that results in compulsion loops. Through the claim, the article fully achieves its purpose because according to research, big tech companies like Snapchat and Instagram rely on stimulating their user's response to make profits. The dopamine surges are further aggravated by posting on social media sites and getting likes and comments. The evidence Brooks provides is reliable and efficient. Nonetheless, the author failed to identify that the challenges of social media are new and universal to the 21st century because of recent advancement in technology and it being an era of media-overload. Thus, it is the responsibility and obligation of teachers and parents to help their children understand the importance of balance and making the most out of media.
Mitigating Problems through User Responsibility
The author suggests that one of the ways to mitigate the problems brought about by big tech companies is for the companies to come to the wake that the usefulness of their technologies is limited to shallow forms of consciousness. They instead crowd and act as a distraction to more profound ways of consciousness which is a necessity for individuals to thrive (Brooks, 2017). Brooks fails to recognize that the user is the one who controls the form of consciousness they want to use and thus the primary determinant of whether to use technology for positive and negative purposes is the user. Some users use social media for connectivity purposes, to push towards a social cause and for collaboration purposes among other uses while other users use it to bully others or spread hate and so on. Nonetheless, the users and creators of technologies have to take shared responsibility for the mess created by advancement of technology.
Prescription for Tech Companies and Personal Responsibility
Towards the end of the article, Brooks gives a prescription for tech companies to take up to reduce the harm. Tech companies ought to portray their products as efficient devices which ensure that their users spend more time offline to experience real life. It is essential that human beings should engage in activities that enhance relationships and experience nature in person rather than behind a screen. Technology cannot pitch itself but its creators can. Additionally, the tech users are also users. Therefore, it is only realistic that everyone agrees to take personal responsibility for habits and behaviors and encourage young people to balance and become responsible while using technology. As much as Brooks and others with the same mindset prefer to blame tech companies for the recent issues around technology, it is everyone's responsibility to step up and taken action to get the most out of a tech-rich environment.
Blaming Digital Media
Further in recent times, the mainstream media has rushed to blame digital media which is a hypocritical move. The advancement in technology and competition among industries, there has been a history of sectors such as the tobacco industry that has worked to invoke addiction through their marketing strategies, sale, and design. People continue to die from various diseases caused by addictions such as cancer and lifestyle diseases. The industries use digital media as a tool for the transmission of their agenda. The fake news and sheer arrogance from big companies did not begin with the revolution of the internet and social media. Brooks suggests that employees have changed their interest in working in the tech industry because of the adverse outcomes associated with the industry. The evidence is weak as a whole to culminate to the conclusion because there are many more issues that lead individuals to shift their interests in working in a particular industry.
Partial Examination of Technology Problems
The op-ed columnist David Brooks claims about the mistakes being made by big tech companies only partially examine the problems of technology. He suggests that the addiction originating from the use of smartphones is driven by the tech companies who feed their user's stimuli responses. However, the users play a significant role in determining whether to use the technology to achieve a positive or an adverse outcome. Brooks has used evidence from research to substantiate his claims but has omitted more data that highlights that the same issues occurred some twenty years back although in different contexts. Nonetheless, the article gives a clear picture of the role of one actor in the current technology crisis but has failed in demonstrating the bigger picture of the crisis.
References
Brooks, D. (2017). How Evil Is Tech?. The New York Times.
YRBSS | Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System | Data | Adolescent and School Health | CDC. (2016). Cdc.gov. Retrieved 1 February 2018, from https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm
