“…the clearest way to see through a culture is to attend [or examine] its tools for conversation” – Neal Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985)
Postman was originally writing against television, but when I read this I couldn’t help but think of our email, text message, Facebook, Twitter infatuated culture.
I’d like to get your thoughts. What do our tools of conversation say about our culture? What are the implications for us as Christians?
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Hey Stephen,
I think that these tools of conversation say a lot about our culture. We are totally obsessed with ourselves! I’m just as guilty, since I just have to check my Facebook or Twitter accounts and update them as much as possible! ya know, cause I have to inform my waiting public! (yes that is sarcasm!)
Again, I am just as guilty of spending more time on these things than say, reading a soul enriching book or better yet my Bible. These tools can be used for so much good, we just have to use them and not have them using us! (not to sound like a conspirator or anything!)
Anyway great thoughts as usual! I appreciate you and your Dad very much!
Blessings
Ron Reffett
Stephen,
My concern with the way much of our culture communicates now is that we’re losing touch with face-to-face relationships and what the essence of that means to the church. I also agree with Ron’s observation that it makes us very narcissistic: we feel the overwhelming compulsion to make sure everyone knows what we’re doing all the time, even if its such banal stuff as “BRB, gotta go to the bathroom!”
I see teens who can’t carry on a decent verbal conversation with someone – even someone their own age, let alone someone older than them.
Postman’s assessment is correct. Yet when he spoke of the television, his concern was (as he titled his book) that we were amusing ourselves to death. Now I wonder if he’d change the title to We’re Texting Ourselves to Death?
I think it says that our culture is quite fad-driven. Look at how far we’ve come in just a couple years. It was the telephone, then email, then blogs, and now social-networking. Cell phones are even taking over all of those now! It’s not going to be long, before some new medium takes over.
Christians need to keep up, however. I’m not saying compromise, but really use each medium that comes along. Sure, there’s problems with each medium, but it is the Christian’s job to get past those problems.
I think there can be a general assumption that people who use Facebook are addicted to it. For me and my friends who see each other a couple times a week-it’s a medium to help us continue conversations. Sometimes it’s regarding the Bible Study, and sometimes it’s regarding that great save Johnny had at the game. The bottom line is that Christian discernment is a must in whatever medium, and that just because the world can misuse-doesn’t mean a medium has no-use.
It strikes me that the same arguments that previous generations had against the theater, and then rock music, are being made against SoMe (social media). It’s bad for society, it stunts your mind, it helps you live in a fantasy world, it encourages lewd behavior, etc.
I do, pretty much, despise Facebook and Twitter (although I have a FB account) and I wish I could throw my cell phone off a cliff (but I can’t because I’m on call 24/7). But I think dealing with SoMe is analogous to previous battles Christians have had with new forms of media (which tend to be rampantly misused). There’s good out there, but the overwhelming misuse paints a black picture. And, although I wouldn’t agree with McLuhan’s “the medium IS the mesage,” I do think there are inherent affects in the medium itself (word, sound, picture, etc.), which is Postman’s point in Amuing Ourselves to Death. Extended reading has a different long-term neurological effect on you than extended TV watching or music listening or TXTing or…
It’ll take a lot of wisdom to know how to engage edifyingly with new mediums while also not being pulled under by their affects.
My family has conflicting opinions. I have always felt bad about social networking, but only because MySpace has such a bad reputation for being dangerous with pedophiles and sex offenders. So, I have personally never had a desire to put my personal information on a page that the whole world can see – even if marked private, we all know that hackers can get where ever they want to – just like robbers can steal what they want – and felons get guns no matter what the laws say. I have a journal that sits on my night stand, and I know that way, no one can read it unless they are in my house – which rules out a whole lot of people – all around the world.
But I have children, and my 12 year old son has been trying to convince me that he wants a MySpace and/or Facebook. I have been able to say no so far, as they both have age limits. YET…..many of his under aged friends’ parents have already allowed their kids to obviously lie about their age so they can have a Facebook or MySpace account (which I totally disagree with and get so angry that a parent would do that – teaching their kids that some rules are okay to break – and making me look like a paranoid stick in the mud to my kids.
But, my son says the age has now been changed to 13, so in a few short months I will have to say no again – and come up with another reason – or give in to this new method of communication.
When I noticed that journalists, politicians, and even preachers have Facebook accounts, I started to think that maybe I should relent. It means something else to monitor closely and requires my getting involved more than I have wanted to as I can’t just let him in there and not monitor what he is doing.
My husband, however, is very against it. He feels it is very dangerous and WILL NOT change his opinion or make any allowances or think about it. He is their step father, so I have final say, but it puts me in such a bad position. I go against a wonderful, Christian man that I and the kids love dearly, or possibly deny my children the ability to grow with technological break troughs for fear of a bad person getting to them.
To say the least I am conflicted and confused about it. I am not confused about how I feel about parents who allow children younger than the rules dictate to be in it anyway – totally the wrong message – but I don’t know what I am going to do when my son is old enough by the rules of Facebook.
The Internet allows for an actual conversation, while television is more of a one-way, controlled-by-those-in-power form of communication. Web-based media give us a lot of opportunities to start discussions about faith; however,online discussions do tend to go the way of “your truth is just as true as my truth,” and it’s hard to present truth as something objective, as the Bible does. (When everyone has equal access to the means of communication, everyone’s opinion becomes equally valid. Earned expertise is now way undervalued.)
The Internet also allows for more in-depth explorations of topics, the lack of which I believe (if I remember correctly) was Postman’s main beef with television. Overall, I believe that our current communication methods have some weaknesses but are an improvement over television for those who want to present God’s truth in a culturally relevant form.
It has been a couple years since I read Postman’s book, but I believe at one point he addressed being exposed to too much media, and its consequences therein (tell me if I’m confusing that with another book). I think that’s the main problem with Twitter/Facebook–it’s like the conversation’s equivalent of diarrhea. Why do my friends need to know what I’m doing every moment? Am I that important? Is that driving them closer to Christ, or closer to myself?
That’s the real danger, I believe…we’re in an age of overload, it’s as if we’ve forgotten how to communicate what’s actually important, so that when it does come that time to deal with hard, life issues, we’re awkward and confused, or at the very best, throwing our pearls before the swine.