One of the biggest and most recalcitrant problems in Nigeria today is
the rapid disappearance of a reading culture. Many people barely read
even newspapers, preferring instead to spend their time chatting on
social networking sites. And others use it for fraudulent and heinous
acts.
It is difficult to escape the influence of social networks. The
trouble of being born in the social networking age is that it
discourages concentration and encourages serial, kaleidoscopic
exposure.
Its variety becomes a narcotic, not a stimulus; you consume not what
you choose and when, but when they choose and what.
In our grandparents' eyes, such a prodigious waste of time would have
been sinful because it is not used constructively for
self-improvement, building moral character and shaping our own
destinies.
Our grandparents would have regarded it as sloth, escapism,
perpetually sucking on visual candies.
Yet, they would probably have found social networking just as
difficult to resist as we do.
Almost anything interesting and rewarding in life requires some
constructive, consistently applied effort.
But not social networking sites that force us to follow their lead.
They force us to live as though we were on a perpetual guided tour:
three hours on Facebook, two hours on Twitter, three hours on MySpace,
four hours on 2go, etc.
The chats are always about romance, gossip or attempts at phishing ―
an unlawful way of obtaining people's identities for fraudulent
purposes.
In short, too much social networking usurps one of the most precious
of all human gifts ― the ability to focus your attention on yourself ―
something only humans can do. Social networking sites have adopted a
particular device to do this to capture one's attention and hold it,
because that is the prime motive of any social networking site.
The economics of social networking sites require them to assemble the
largest possible audience for every moment (because that enhances its
role as a profitable advertising vehicle). They live in fear of losing
subscribers, rich or poor, dull or bright.
So, the safest technique to guarantee mass attention is to keep
everyone happy and allow them unlimited freedom.
I see the ethos of evil socialization pervading this nation and its culture.
I think that evil socialization has become a model in all social
networking sites, where their management allows people unhindered
liberty to do what they like. I think it has become fashionable to
think that social networks are the way to build a relationship and
engage in romance.
I do not think that education is immune to the virus.
And the responsibility of education is enormous.
Teachers should reconsider the casual assumptions which social
networking tends to cultivate ― that bite size is the best, complexity
must be avoided, nuances are dispersible, qualification impedes the
simple message, visual stimulation is a substitute for thought, and
that verbal precision is an anachronism.
Literacy may not be a human right but the highly literate founding
fathers might not have found it unreasonable or unattainable. We have
not only failed to attain literacy as a country, statistically
speaking but are also falling farther and farther short of attaining
it.
And while I would not go straight in suggesting that social networking
sites are the cause, I believe they contribute to it and are an
influence; for the dull a substitute, for the brilliant a diversion.
In our schools and homes today, teachers and parents think that social
networking is the best way to impart knowledge and create
relationships.
It has dire consequences, as students have abandoned reading but that
does not mean that social networking is not good for students.
If it must be involved in the process of learning, its use must be
critical and more selective. I believe it is called "Internet
literacy" if it is used to whet the appetite of students for other
discipline and courses. It becomes useful if it is used to prepare a
child for core competence and build skills that will positively
benefit society in the future.
But that is not what I am talking about.
Always check comments For posts continuation.!!!!
(Also drop your comments on this).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am talking about the tendency that I have noticed to surrender to the ethos that social networking subtly purveys: the idea that things are gotten easily, with little effort; that information can be absorbed passively; that by reading few lines online and looking at pictures, children are absorbing as much information as they might through printed pages.
ReplyDeleteThat is what I mean by pandering to the easy virtues of social networks, of letting young people believe that ideas are conveyed by tasty bits; that intellectual efforts need not be applied; that you can get it (as they say) quickly and painlessly.
When, in human history, has humanity collectively surrendered so much of its leisure time to one toy, one mass diversion? When did all classes and kinds of men surrender themselves wholesale, making their minds, psyches and bodies prisoners of a medium?
The world is being force fed with trivialities, with ill-perceived effects on habits of mind, language, and our tolerance for effort and our appetite for complexity.
Those are the adverse effects of social networking sites.
In my opinion, there should be a way to balance freedom with responsibility for using social media. Parents must endeavor to educate their wards on the dangers of the Internet and allow them to use it profitably.
Today’s teenagers are online doing practically nothing but chatting all day.
They could channel their energy into research using their phones, laptops or tablets to increase their knowledge which will in turn increase their academic performance.
This way, we will reduce if not eradicate criminal urges and tendencies.
Drop your comments !!!
Thanks.