Morning:
8°c
Writing, in Socrates'opinion, was a dangerous invention: “It destroys memory and weakens the mind, relieving it of work that makes it strong.”
Archbishop Nichols, head of the Catholic Church in England, is thus part of a long and respectable tradition when he suggests that the latest form of information technology is undermining civilisation. And he is as wrong as Socrates.
According to the archbishop, electronic communication means that “as a society we're losing some of the ability to build interpersonal communication that's necessary for living together and building a community”.
He's also worried that social-networking sites are “dehumanising” community life, that they lead to “transient” relationships and that they encourage young people to view friendship as a “commodity” and to boast of the number of friends they have.
Spending what I laughingly describe as my “summer holiday” in a damp cottage in the sodden countryside, I have the opportunity to observe at close quarters the effect of social networking on the relationships of teenagers and pre-teens.
The number of young people in my sample (three) is not statistically significant but tends to accord with scientific studies on the subject. My observations have led me to the conclusion that the archbishop is wrong on all four points.
First, I reckon that social networking is encouraging, not discouraging, interpersonal communication and community-building. My children communicate mostly with school friends, not with 50-year-old weirdos in Iowa, so their use of technology tends to strengthen their existing friendship groups.
Second, they discuss subjects of mutual interest, such as clothing brands, music and each other. That, as far as I remember, is what girls always have done, and is therefore eminently human.
Third, they use the internet not just to chat with friends from their current school but also to keep in touch with people from previous schools.
Most of my friends from the many schools I went to, by contrast, disappeared into the mists of time. Technology thus makes their friendships longer-lasting, not more transient, than mine were.
Fourth, the tendency of young persons to count their worth in friends is, sadly, an ancient one, and not Facebook's fault. “Loser! You got no friends,” is the oldest taunt in the playground.
I reckon my children are lucky to have social-networking sites. I spent much of my adolescence stuck in a house on the edge of the North York moors. With Facebook, I would have had more friends and spent fewer hours playing patience.
It's tempting to regard all the influences that went into building one's character as beneficial; but I can't see how loneliness did me much good, nor why my children should suffer it.
Yet there is a downside to social networking. Electronic communication does have a victim. It's me. My children are strangely less inclined to chat to me than to spend time refining their interpersonal communication skills online.
An evening playing Old Maid and Racing Demon seems to hold fewer charms than one discussing shopping and music with their friends on Facebook.
Since I like my children to talk to me occasionally, I have temporarily confiscated all electronic communication devices — not, as the archbishop would, for their benefit, but for my own.
Auntie has model ethic
Once the parliamentary scandal had run its course, the newspapers decided that the BBC looked the next most promising target. It has, sadly, failed to deliver. Its executives' expense claims were boringly modest, and the latest exposé, about Jay Hunt, the BBC1 controller, is not up to much either.
Ms Hunt is secretary of a company her husband runs which provides training for the BBC. This sounds scandalous enough, except that the BBC requires executives to recuse themselves from decisions involving companies in which they have an interest. And that's the useful lesson for the future. The BBC thinks carefully about how to avoid ethical pitfalls. Parliament didn't.
Come back, Gordon Brown, all is forgiven
With Gordon Brown on holiday, his deputy, Harriet Harman, is in charge. Her pronouncement that “men cannot be left to run things on their own”; her recommendation that either the leader or the deputy leader of the Labour Party should always be a woman; her suggestion that if Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters things wouldn't have gone so badly; her decision to reappoint Trevor Phillips as head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission: all point to one conclusion. Ms Harman cannot be left to run things on her own. Come back, Mr Brown, all is forgiven.
The outlook's still chilly for the Met
It is not the Met Office that was foolish but those pouring bile on it. The weathermen did not “promise” us a “barbecue summer”. They said there was a 65 per cent probability that the weather would be better than normal. We spend our lives calculating risk and probability.
We lay our bets, as the Met did, with the best information to hand. Sometimes they come off, sometimes they don't. The only stupid thing the Met did was to think it could treat us like grown-ups and not be vilified for it. It won't make that mistake again.
Emma Duncan is deputy editor of The Economist.
Reader views (2)
The biggest problem with the young and Facebook is the degree to which the content is effectively public knowledge and easy to access. Unwise admissions about alcohol, sex etc which were once just discussed among young people are now placed on computer record for future employers, the authorities and all to trawl through (which court cases have confirmed does happen). At the very least these aspects should be made clear to those taking part in sites like Facebook. This is not in the least bit like the traditional idea of friends talking together about "clothing brands or music".
- Damian Hockney, London, UK, 04/08/2009 23:34
Report abuse
You chose to allow your children to bond more with strangers than with yourself by letting them overly use the internet.
Parents should take responsibility for their children, and not be such a pushover where this technology is concerned - or her (unknown) "virtual" pier group will become her lifetimes influence,and NOT her mother, as it SHOULD be.
- Darius Midwinter, London UK, 04/08/2009 15:52
Report abuse
