Hyperlink Hypocrites

So I'm reading CNN's article on MRI brain-scan experiments. USC Sociologists, real science. NPR has it here.

In the articles, negative aspects of rapid-fire news media are examined.

The experiment? Briefly, a 13-person sample showed it takes up to ~6 seconds to comprehend and respond to images of others in non-physical pain, compared to ~2 seconds for physical pain.

Their experiment examples: subjects were quick to say "ouch" when watching footage of an ankle breaking, not so much for footage of a mentally disabled person longing for sexual relationships.

What's really being addressed is contemplation duration. Implied in the article is the notion that not enough time is allowed to focus on the meanings of news articles, given their rapidity and volume.

Well….

Visiting professor at more than 20 Universities Stafford Beer, using the principles of attenuation, touched on this problem in his 1974 CBC lectures, later published as 'Designing Freedom'.



Imagine pulling JengaTM pieces whilst others are continually stacking - your focus and balance point would be ever-shifting.

We’re likely observing the growing pains of a meaningful shift in population size, compounded by accompanying technological advances.



Meaningful growth patterns exist.



Online presence has grown in a similar fashion.


Consider this growth in conjunction with the steady exponential growth of Moore's Law:




What can be seen is a large blooming of humans, and the tools we use; what increases steadily in accordance is the technology driving the tools we use.


My point of contention is the CNN headline.



"Scientists warn of Twitter dangers"

Do they?

Quoting the article:

USC sociologist Manuel Castells said the study raised more concerns over fast-moving TV than the online environment.

Looks like they do not.

Don’t just blame Twitter…


And Yes, I have a Sociology degree....