You’ve probably been hearing the phrase “global village” for your whole life, and the phrase is usually associated with warm and fuzzy feelings about the interconnectedness of all people and the universality of the human condition. The reality, however, as we’ve been seeing recently, is not especially warm and very far from fuzzy. What’s gone wrong here? Technology observer and popular author Nicholas Carr addresses the topic in this April 2017 Boston Globe essay. (If you are using the Readings version of the book, you may also want to read another of Carr’s essays in Chapter 17 of your text.)
Read it here: Carr, “How tech created a global village—and put us at each other’s throats”
- Carr points to the cherished idea “that technological progress is sufficient to ensure social progress.” As pleasant and appealing as that idea may be, though, Carr isn’t convinced. Why not? What evidence does he present to support his assertion that the idea is simply “a fantasy”? Is his argument persuasive? Why or why not?
- The concept of the “global village” is a prominent element in Carr’s essay; the phrase appears in both the title and the opening sentence, as well as later on. Still, Carr holds off on giving any contextual information about the origin of the phrase for several more paragraphs; the ideas of the phrase’s originator, Marshall McLuhan, are presented later still. Why might Carr have waited so long to talk more about the key concept of the “global village”? Should the information have been presented sooner or more prominently? Why or why not? Explain your reasoning.
- As Chapter 3 of your text points out, quotations should be carefully selected in order to “support your text at the particular point where you insert them.” Select three of the many quotations from diverse sources that Carr employs, and discuss how each quotation enhances what Carr is saying. Mention also the purpose of each quotation—to support Carr’s main point or to provide a counter example of what he is arguing.
- Reflect on your own use of or knowledge about social media. How well does Carr’s depiction of social media users describe you, personally? Have you ever written comments or opinions that you wouldn’t likely express in a face-to-face conversation? Do you disclose more about yourself online that you might do in person? Write an essay in which you use your own practices and experiences as evidence to support or refute (or both) Carr’s assertions. Point to specific passages from his essay as your They Say.
They Say I Blog 
I love how Carr quotes of how radio “would make war impossible. because it will make war ridiculous” or the telephone system would “join all the peoples of the earth in one brotherhood.” Whenever a new technology comes out people think it will revolutionalize the world. To a large extent, it has. The world is a better place and has changed a great deal even in the last 50 years, but we cant think that by replacing our morals with machines they will increase. As Carr puts it “Technology is an amplifier. It magnifies our best traits, and it magnifies our worst.” The coined phrase global village used to unite all of us together isn’t so true after all.
I have social media accounts but I don’t use them very much. I am generally closed off online and open up more in person after I get to know them and trust them. I am not one to air out my dirty laundry for everyone to see online. I have noticed however that people, in general, are more open to discussing there intimate personal lives online rather than in person. Generally, people are braver online and willing to say things they wouldn’t say in person whether that be positive or negative and I myself have done that as well.
LikeLike
In his article “How Tech Created a Global Village-and Put us at Each Other’s Throats,” Nicholas Carr points to the ever-expanding market of social media, and how every time a new invention comes out everyone thinks that it will change the world. Carr then goes on to say that with these new inventions the world is not progressing but regressing in terms of behavior. Carr says being able to say anything with relative anonymity from anywhere decreases any sort of need for basic manners and the like. Carr proceeds to say that being globally connected further widens the gap between beliefs and emphasizes differences more than similarities. Contrary to what Carr says, this is not always the case. There have been many instances of large groups of people with similar interests coming together to help a complete stranger. One recent event like this happened amongst fans of Marvel Studios, where one fan is going to see a movie earlier than it is set to be released because he would not be able to see it due to cancer he is fighting. That accomplishment would not be possible if not for the uniting and outcrying of groups of fans on the internet. In conclusion, Carr seems to be thinking too optimistically if he thinks that one thing, whether it is social media or any other advancement, can cause everyone in the world to get along better. Throughout history, humans have taken good things and used them for their own selfish reasons, and to expect that to change anytime soon is to expect human nature itself to change.
LikeLike
Nicholas Carr writes in an article about the turnout of what was intended for the increasing social media platforms, verses what is actually happening. Caar states before the launch of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg explains that the purpose for his platform is for “uniting a community to encourage self-expression and conversation”, a community to broaden perspective on the lives and cultures of others. This online community, and others similar to it, was created to connect friends and family, to share events and adventures, and to advance communications. Yet, the intention for these united communities didn’t come into play, communication dissolves differences was an intended idea for the creation of such a broad community. Instead, it turned everyone against each other. People like others better when they know less about them, that they place greater stress on the differences of people rather than the way we are similar. This turned community platform can “highlight our best traits, but also our worst”. Although social media platforms have created problems within each other, it’s not up to technology to make us better people, and that fact is on us.
I agree with Nicholas Carr’s response to the growing problems related to social media. There were good intentions for the creations of platforms, such as Facebook, but it almost seemed to backfire. The closer that the community gets, “the more at risk they are for turning against each other”, and the harder it is to not notice the annoying traits that comes with each person. People are in each others businesses, their self-esteem is based on the number of followers, likes and friends, just to post endless information about themselves online that they most likely won’t share during a physical conversation. Computers have added to communities online turning against one another, making it easier to judge and get annoyed. But, the fact is, the level of your character isn’t dependent on a screen, and we can’t keep blaming computers on how we are as people, to be better is on you, not a silly screen or platform.
LikeLike