Every technology is a double-edged sword. I’ve written about this topic a few times and recently have started reading Supremacy by Parmy Olson, which explores Sam Altman's and Demis Hassabis's ambitions. It’s a well-written book, and while it highlights the noble goals these AI pioneers initially had—building systems to solve big problems of today and tomorrow—it also underscores a growing concern: the profit-driven spread of flawed and biased technology into industries, education, and media. This is the real threat of artificial intelligence, which its top creators often ignore.
As I’ve said before, the internet and smartphones are two of the most significant technological inventions of recent decades. But, like any two-edged sword, they come with significant downsides. The internet gave us social media, and smartphones made it available 24/7. Now, with tools like SORA 2, we’re entering a new level of addiction. AI without any human help using agents can create endless content streams, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s already being used. Companies like OpenAI, which once aimed to stay non-profit and build AI for everyone, now follow the same path as Google, Meta, and others—prioritizing profit by capturing our attention, keeping us online, and driving consumption. Billions of dollars in potential revenue can kill even the best intentions.
No amount of education can fully save us unless we each take steps to build barriers between ourselves and the explosion of mostly fake, addictive media. It’s easier said than done. Substack, for example, has become a kind of social media platform itself, designed to keep us scrolling endlessly. There’s always one more article to read, and we’re tempted to believe the next one will be important.
Still, there are solutions. I’ve found it helpful to avoid social media altogether and have proposed simple habits—like going for a walk, keeping your phone in your pocket the entire time, and using the opportunity to talk and think about what you’re reading or other topics. Instead of doomscrolling when you get home, pick up a book. These are small but meaningful ways to reclaim your time and attention.
And why read? Because, as I’ve said before, reading requires active engagement. Unlike watching TV or scrolling social media, which demand little effort, reading forces you to think critically and deeply. It’s not just about extracting information but about training the mind and enlarging the soul—work no machine can do for us. As Spencer Klavan writes in his article(https://tinyurl.com/3cu4k736), reading remains uniquely humanizing because it integrates knowledge into character. AI can summarize a book, but never replicate the transformative experience of reading it.
I will end with a quote from Tim Wu: "If you don’t actively choose what to pay attention to, the world will choose for you—and it won’t have your best interests in mind."
True MG. The shift in companies such as OpenAI, like that explored in Parmy Olson's Supremacy, perfectly illustrates Postman's concept of the Technopoly, where tools do not merely serve human ends but actively define them (and, in this case, define the end as profit). Your critique of AI is precisely the necessary epistemological diagnosis Postman provided for television: AI agents creating "endless content streams" (SORA 2, deepfakes) represents the ultimate weaponization of the "information glut" to drown out meaning. The quality of the content is irrelevant; the goal is continuous, effortless consumption.
You are absolutely right that "Billions of dollars in potential revenue can kill even the best intentions." This confirms Postman’s fear that when a technology is introduced for "efficiency" (or optimization, or profit), its democratic or ethical function is instantly compromised. The tool’s design prioritizes capture, not contemplation.
I agree wholeheartedly that "No amount of education can fully save us unless we each take steps to build barriers." Your practical solutions, the walk, avoiding social media, choosing a book, are the necessary individual counterargument that Postman's pedagogy seeks to foster. I speak of this often, but it is not easy to foster. We just have to show.
Teaching students to ask, "What is this medium doing to me?" this active engagement (The Personal Barrier). Choosing reading because, as you, me and Spencer Klavan note, it demands active engagement and integrates knowledge into character, a transformation no machine can replicate.
"If you don’t actively choose what to pay attention to, the world will choose for you", is the perfect modern corollary to Postman’s entire warning. It collapses the civilizational threat down to a single, urgent, daily choice we must each make to save our attention and, ultimately, our minds.
The biggest question is: What would it take to change our behavior? Reading books is declining at an alarming rate among young adults, and I fear we are heading toward a future where human-written books may become rare. If that happens, it would be like returning to the Dark Ages—not in ignorance but intellectual stagnation. Books have always been a cornerstone of critical thinking, creativity, and the ability to engage with complex ideas. Without them, we risk losing our capacity to think deeply and independently.
Even if AI can write a book, it will never understand the human condition as a human does. Such books might read well but lack the depth, empathy, and insight to resonate with us or truly improve the human experience. They would be hollow, devoid of the meaning that only human creativity and perspective can provide.
Social media and AI are accelerating this decline, flooding society with fake, biased, and algorithmically optimized content designed to maximize engagement—not truth. The line between fact and fiction will blur as AI-generated material becomes indistinguishable from human-created works. People will be overwhelmed by misinformation and endless distractions, leaving them passive consumers instead of active thinkers. Distinguishing what is true will become increasingly complex and challenging, and in a world where truth is elusive, how will our democracy survive?
Democracy depends on an informed and critically engaged citizenry. Without the ability to discern truth from manipulation, society will fracture along misinformation and bias lines, deepening divisions and eroding trust.
I will end with Ray Bradbury's warning: "You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." Unfortunately, we may be heading there.
For me, the book has always been the ultimate technology of slowness. It doesn't just convey information; it disciplines the mind to follow a sustained, non-linear chain of thought that has no immediate reward beyond the insight.
If that cultural cornerstone is replaced by algorithmically optimized content,even AI-written books that "read well" but lack depth, empathy, and insight, the cost is exactly what you suggest: the erosion of our capacity for deep, independent thought.
Your final point about democracy surviving is the critical stakes. Postman warned that spectacle makes the truth irrelevant; the AI age threatens to make the truth indistinguishable. When the line between human creation and machine-optimized content blurs, the foundation of democratic citizenship, the ability to discern and reason, fractures.
Like you, I feel the urgency of Bradbury's warning. We are not burning books; we are just making them culturally invisible. The fight to protect that space for deep reading and humanistic thought now feels less like an academic debate and more like an act of radical preservation. It starts, as you've modeled in your own life, with carving out those small, defensible territories of stillness every day.
“to follow a sustained, non-linear chain of thought” so we can build “our capacity for deep independent thought.” Postman, and the concern that “spectacle makes the truth irrelevant” and “We are not burning books; we are just making them culturally invisible”. Good summary from you.
This is frighteningly well described as to where we may go. One event in town is a reading evening of complete quiet at various locations downtown. And our local bookstore is providing that reading quiet time to young students as well. Quiet and a book. How “novel”.
Well summarized. The analogy of nation-states an “aha!” connection. Thinking this morning while walking of WMD as weapons of mind destruction. The control of the mind the ultimate fiefdom fiercely fought over. Fealty supports hierarchy. That
becomes an AI ascendancy and what we are wondering is where is accountability arising along with control? Will AI help humans flourish or find us Luddites to discount. Asking these questions before we arrive at the juncture of no return is needed dialogue.
Thank you for opening Pandora’s box to look inside rather than go along for the ride oblivious. Or we wind up in the land of Oblivion?
A question for you. Is the drive for profits needed to build the data centers and provide the hardware acquisitioning dollars to keep evolving? Content consumed equals cash to continue? We see the outflow but not how it grows, like tree roots that provide unseen required support, the profits support growth. “No amount of education can fully save us unless we each take steps to build barriers” is good advice. The flood of fakes and outrage can warp us if we are not willing to discern. And always “try before you buy” like test driving a car to make sure it is as advertised, or truthfully represented. “Substack as a social media platform itself.” Yes and living in a very connected community of varied personalities I enjoy meeting minds here, now both friends and strangers, who share what they think on a variety of topics. This platform is filled with diverse interests and I cherish that, yet you are right that time is limited to read it all. Your Tim Wu quote is a keeper.
Yes, data centers are expensive—but software margins remain uniquely high due to near‑zero marginal costs and network effects. Those margins reward maximizing engagement, even when it makes products more addictive or biased. Choosing to reduce those harms usually means lower profits—less cash to pay nine‑figure comp packages or to buy potential rivals. As dominance deepens, these firms behave less like companies and more like quasi–nation-states, setting rules for speech, markets, and identity without public accountability.
Here is another example, I did not see a lot of conversation about it as yet:
The article argues that SpaceX’s $17 billion purchase of EchoStar’s spectrum marks a pivotal power shift from nation-states to private infrastructure owners by enabling direct satellite-to-smartphone connectivity that bypasses terrestrial networks, regulators, and borders. As phones seamlessly switch between towers and satellites, governments could lose long-held levers over communications and, combined with borderless digital payments, face accelerated regulatory arbitrage that undermines control over speech and monetary policy. Drawing parallels to Britain’s telegraph-era dominance and Starlink’s role in Ukraine, the piece warns that states without competing space infrastructure risk becoming “hollow states,” dependent on corporate goodwill for critical services. With rivals behind and few good options—bans, costly state constellations, or subordinate access deals—governments must quickly evolve regulatory frameworks and strategies, or watch platform and network policies by companies like SpaceX, Amazon, Meta, and Google eclipse traditional sovereignty.
“pivotal power shift from nation states to private control by infrastructure owners”…”the undermining of speech and monetary policy”…”The eclipse of traditional sovereignty”. A new colonization of humanity following a trail of years to usher in a better world or Bleak House. Hope springs eternal. Unless this becomes infernal.
So insightful beyond words. The “railing with a clenched fist and a stack of Plato” a memorable image. I see Postman as a postal carrier of wisdom bringing correspondence of awareness to us for contemplation. Your “from typographical seriousness to televisual spectacle”…”no longer asking”…”Is it true?” but “Is it entertaining?” bringing a loss of trust in what we are fed and then the callousness to truth develops, for who knows? And “what kind of mind does the medium make of me?” “To read Postman is to be reminded that rational discourse is not natural to human beings; it must be built, ritualized, sustained. And it can be lost.” This is a call to arms for arming ourselves with active engagement we create and time for friends who prefer the meaningful to the mundane and the truth not the spin.
Exactly Cathie. thank you. Once we substitute "entertaining" for "true," a "loss of trust" and the subsequent "callousness to truth" is inevitable. It is exactly that shift that makes active, conscious engagement, the "call to arms", our only viable defense.
"...the contrast between Orwell and Huxley. Orwell feared the suppression of information; Huxley feared its glut. Orwell’s nightmare was the Ministry of Truth; Huxley’s was the feelies. Postman’s wager was simple: Huxley was right".
I think both were right.
.
"We would not need an iron boot stomping on a human face, we would beg for our chains, provided they came with a laugh track".
We're getting both, and the combination is devastating.
.
"America, he argued, had crossed from a technocracy (where tools serve human ends) into a technopoly, where tools define what human ends are".
A sensation reminiscent of drowning.
.
"Only the stubborn hope that education, real education, not job training or screen time gamification, might help".
To accomplish this, and I believe it's urgent that we do, we need to somehow break the chokehold of laissez faire, zero sum, winner take all capitalism.
I appreciate you pushing back on the simplicity of the Huxley vs. Orwell wager. Viewing our current state as a tragic synergy, a "devastating" combination of suppression and addiction, is acutely accurate.
And I wholeheartedly agree with your final thought: the chokehold of winner-take-all capitalism is the highest barrier to Postman's solution. "Real education" requires stillness, attention, and value placed on long-term insight, none of which are rewarded by a zero-sum, attention-driven economy. Promoting true education means advocating for a structure where human wisdom, not profit, is the primary goal. We can't fix the epistemology without addressing the underlying economics that weaponize the technology.
That's the long term war humanity's been waging since the dawn of civilization. What we call "civilization" itself was created in a most savage way - when one man dominated over thousands, even millions - of others. This lasted for centuries until along came the Constitution to put some (rather weak) constraints on excessive power, and institute a form of power sharing.
It was a great experiment while it lasted, but was deeply flawed, as exemplified by the current upheaval we're facing today.
Depending on which way things go, this could be the beginning of the end, or a new beginning. The masses have been rather quiescent the past few decades, but that's finally changing. Where it will take us is unpredictable, but there is potential for us to finally move closer promoting wisdom over an extra buck for those who don't even need it.
Unfortunately, I agree that the quiescence of the past few decades seems to be ending, which makes the outcome truly unpredictable. The fundamental conflict remains the same, as you suggest: promoting wisdom (Postman's goal) over the extra buck (the core drive of the current Technopoly). The key is directing that shifting energy toward reclaiming the capacity for deep thought and critical citizenship.
That will be a neat trick. Those who typically rise to positions of sufficient power to move masses rarely have the masses best interests at heart. Even if/when we succeed at taking down this emerging autocracy, we can only hope that whoever fills the resulting power vacuum will act on our behalf.
And one of the best places for interesting conversations, minus the blotting paper of images, I have found is in the waiting line at the Supermarket, in the waiting rooms, meeting the postman at one's letterbox, the next door neighbour...
I look to the future and foresee a time when 'words' go the way of cash...slowly disappearing and being replaced by credit cards.
Credit cards of a certain limited amount allowable for grunts, stunned looks, mangled english expressions of C'rap' graffiti and clichés...striving to communicate.
A bleak future depicting the Tower of Babel's proliferation of strange noises...
It is true, I also discover in 'waiting lines' the vital role of un-optimized, spontaneous space in fostering real discourse. These are the precious few places left where people are extracted from the "blotting paper of images" and forced into shared reality. Rational public discourse is not natural; it requires effort.
If the cultural gravity pulls us toward linguistic credit cards instead of the rich, complex 'cash' of words, we are indeed heading toward a Tower of Babel built not of strange noises, but of endless, empty clichés.
Beautiful summary of a beautiful mind, thank you. Large parts of the essay overlap with 6-month old episode of Undivided Attention (The Man Who Predicted the Downfall of Thinking, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPr9h-yb1rU).
Too often I see reading and writing as the only path forward out. I disagree. I grew up reading a lot... inside videogames. They weren't shooters, but point and click adventure games, they were economic simulators and city builders, and ultimately massive online games. While the level of the prose was kept at the young adult level (which I was) and made visually digestable like a script of a movie, it made me interested in learning. And active participation by play promoted curiosity for life.
This is to say new media can work very well and move us forward in an unexpected direction. I for one am happy I don't have to remember my friends phone number. That my taxi driver doesn't know every street and hotel in the city. The simple issue is what we replaced it with - more work, optimized funnel to extract money, without providing meaning beyond the profit. People behind the taxi driver, uber's wheel, and Uber's backoffice are all checked out.
Value-driven generational thinking is a way to prevent Idiocracy.
So true. Postman’s critique isn't a blanket condemnation of new media; it’s a condemnation of media that is epistemologically incompatible with rational public discourse. Active participation, complexity, and systems thinking (like in city builders) promote curiosity and learning. This is a powerful counter-example to the kind of media that just asks us to sit back and scroll.
I hope you are feeling better.
Every technology is a double-edged sword. I’ve written about this topic a few times and recently have started reading Supremacy by Parmy Olson, which explores Sam Altman's and Demis Hassabis's ambitions. It’s a well-written book, and while it highlights the noble goals these AI pioneers initially had—building systems to solve big problems of today and tomorrow—it also underscores a growing concern: the profit-driven spread of flawed and biased technology into industries, education, and media. This is the real threat of artificial intelligence, which its top creators often ignore.
As I’ve said before, the internet and smartphones are two of the most significant technological inventions of recent decades. But, like any two-edged sword, they come with significant downsides. The internet gave us social media, and smartphones made it available 24/7. Now, with tools like SORA 2, we’re entering a new level of addiction. AI without any human help using agents can create endless content streams, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s already being used. Companies like OpenAI, which once aimed to stay non-profit and build AI for everyone, now follow the same path as Google, Meta, and others—prioritizing profit by capturing our attention, keeping us online, and driving consumption. Billions of dollars in potential revenue can kill even the best intentions.
No amount of education can fully save us unless we each take steps to build barriers between ourselves and the explosion of mostly fake, addictive media. It’s easier said than done. Substack, for example, has become a kind of social media platform itself, designed to keep us scrolling endlessly. There’s always one more article to read, and we’re tempted to believe the next one will be important.
Still, there are solutions. I’ve found it helpful to avoid social media altogether and have proposed simple habits—like going for a walk, keeping your phone in your pocket the entire time, and using the opportunity to talk and think about what you’re reading or other topics. Instead of doomscrolling when you get home, pick up a book. These are small but meaningful ways to reclaim your time and attention.
And why read? Because, as I’ve said before, reading requires active engagement. Unlike watching TV or scrolling social media, which demand little effort, reading forces you to think critically and deeply. It’s not just about extracting information but about training the mind and enlarging the soul—work no machine can do for us. As Spencer Klavan writes in his article(https://tinyurl.com/3cu4k736), reading remains uniquely humanizing because it integrates knowledge into character. AI can summarize a book, but never replicate the transformative experience of reading it.
I will end with a quote from Tim Wu: "If you don’t actively choose what to pay attention to, the world will choose for you—and it won’t have your best interests in mind."
True MG. The shift in companies such as OpenAI, like that explored in Parmy Olson's Supremacy, perfectly illustrates Postman's concept of the Technopoly, where tools do not merely serve human ends but actively define them (and, in this case, define the end as profit). Your critique of AI is precisely the necessary epistemological diagnosis Postman provided for television: AI agents creating "endless content streams" (SORA 2, deepfakes) represents the ultimate weaponization of the "information glut" to drown out meaning. The quality of the content is irrelevant; the goal is continuous, effortless consumption.
You are absolutely right that "Billions of dollars in potential revenue can kill even the best intentions." This confirms Postman’s fear that when a technology is introduced for "efficiency" (or optimization, or profit), its democratic or ethical function is instantly compromised. The tool’s design prioritizes capture, not contemplation.
I agree wholeheartedly that "No amount of education can fully save us unless we each take steps to build barriers." Your practical solutions, the walk, avoiding social media, choosing a book, are the necessary individual counterargument that Postman's pedagogy seeks to foster. I speak of this often, but it is not easy to foster. We just have to show.
Teaching students to ask, "What is this medium doing to me?" this active engagement (The Personal Barrier). Choosing reading because, as you, me and Spencer Klavan note, it demands active engagement and integrates knowledge into character, a transformation no machine can replicate.
"If you don’t actively choose what to pay attention to, the world will choose for you", is the perfect modern corollary to Postman’s entire warning. It collapses the civilizational threat down to a single, urgent, daily choice we must each make to save our attention and, ultimately, our minds.
The biggest question is: What would it take to change our behavior? Reading books is declining at an alarming rate among young adults, and I fear we are heading toward a future where human-written books may become rare. If that happens, it would be like returning to the Dark Ages—not in ignorance but intellectual stagnation. Books have always been a cornerstone of critical thinking, creativity, and the ability to engage with complex ideas. Without them, we risk losing our capacity to think deeply and independently.
Even if AI can write a book, it will never understand the human condition as a human does. Such books might read well but lack the depth, empathy, and insight to resonate with us or truly improve the human experience. They would be hollow, devoid of the meaning that only human creativity and perspective can provide.
Social media and AI are accelerating this decline, flooding society with fake, biased, and algorithmically optimized content designed to maximize engagement—not truth. The line between fact and fiction will blur as AI-generated material becomes indistinguishable from human-created works. People will be overwhelmed by misinformation and endless distractions, leaving them passive consumers instead of active thinkers. Distinguishing what is true will become increasingly complex and challenging, and in a world where truth is elusive, how will our democracy survive?
Democracy depends on an informed and critically engaged citizenry. Without the ability to discern truth from manipulation, society will fracture along misinformation and bias lines, deepening divisions and eroding trust.
I will end with Ray Bradbury's warning: "You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." Unfortunately, we may be heading there.
For me, the book has always been the ultimate technology of slowness. It doesn't just convey information; it disciplines the mind to follow a sustained, non-linear chain of thought that has no immediate reward beyond the insight.
If that cultural cornerstone is replaced by algorithmically optimized content,even AI-written books that "read well" but lack depth, empathy, and insight, the cost is exactly what you suggest: the erosion of our capacity for deep, independent thought.
Your final point about democracy surviving is the critical stakes. Postman warned that spectacle makes the truth irrelevant; the AI age threatens to make the truth indistinguishable. When the line between human creation and machine-optimized content blurs, the foundation of democratic citizenship, the ability to discern and reason, fractures.
Like you, I feel the urgency of Bradbury's warning. We are not burning books; we are just making them culturally invisible. The fight to protect that space for deep reading and humanistic thought now feels less like an academic debate and more like an act of radical preservation. It starts, as you've modeled in your own life, with carving out those small, defensible territories of stillness every day.
“to follow a sustained, non-linear chain of thought” so we can build “our capacity for deep independent thought.” Postman, and the concern that “spectacle makes the truth irrelevant” and “We are not burning books; we are just making them culturally invisible”. Good summary from you.
This is frighteningly well described as to where we may go. One event in town is a reading evening of complete quiet at various locations downtown. And our local bookstore is providing that reading quiet time to young students as well. Quiet and a book. How “novel”.
Well summarized. The analogy of nation-states an “aha!” connection. Thinking this morning while walking of WMD as weapons of mind destruction. The control of the mind the ultimate fiefdom fiercely fought over. Fealty supports hierarchy. That
becomes an AI ascendancy and what we are wondering is where is accountability arising along with control? Will AI help humans flourish or find us Luddites to discount. Asking these questions before we arrive at the juncture of no return is needed dialogue.
Thank you for opening Pandora’s box to look inside rather than go along for the ride oblivious. Or we wind up in the land of Oblivion?
I used ChatGPT. Since I no longer code, summarization is one of the product's best use cases for me. I read the article, not the summary.
ChatGPT: Great Productive Thinking.
A question for you. Is the drive for profits needed to build the data centers and provide the hardware acquisitioning dollars to keep evolving? Content consumed equals cash to continue? We see the outflow but not how it grows, like tree roots that provide unseen required support, the profits support growth. “No amount of education can fully save us unless we each take steps to build barriers” is good advice. The flood of fakes and outrage can warp us if we are not willing to discern. And always “try before you buy” like test driving a car to make sure it is as advertised, or truthfully represented. “Substack as a social media platform itself.” Yes and living in a very connected community of varied personalities I enjoy meeting minds here, now both friends and strangers, who share what they think on a variety of topics. This platform is filled with diverse interests and I cherish that, yet you are right that time is limited to read it all. Your Tim Wu quote is a keeper.
Yes, data centers are expensive—but software margins remain uniquely high due to near‑zero marginal costs and network effects. Those margins reward maximizing engagement, even when it makes products more addictive or biased. Choosing to reduce those harms usually means lower profits—less cash to pay nine‑figure comp packages or to buy potential rivals. As dominance deepens, these firms behave less like companies and more like quasi–nation-states, setting rules for speech, markets, and identity without public accountability.
Here is another example, I did not see a lot of conversation about it as yet:
The article argues that SpaceX’s $17 billion purchase of EchoStar’s spectrum marks a pivotal power shift from nation-states to private infrastructure owners by enabling direct satellite-to-smartphone connectivity that bypasses terrestrial networks, regulators, and borders. As phones seamlessly switch between towers and satellites, governments could lose long-held levers over communications and, combined with borderless digital payments, face accelerated regulatory arbitrage that undermines control over speech and monetary policy. Drawing parallels to Britain’s telegraph-era dominance and Starlink’s role in Ukraine, the piece warns that states without competing space infrastructure risk becoming “hollow states,” dependent on corporate goodwill for critical services. With rivals behind and few good options—bans, costly state constellations, or subordinate access deals—governments must quickly evolve regulatory frameworks and strategies, or watch platform and network policies by companies like SpaceX, Amazon, Meta, and Google eclipse traditional sovereignty.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/09/29/musk-space-x-satellites-phones-communications/
“pivotal power shift from nation states to private control by infrastructure owners”…”the undermining of speech and monetary policy”…”The eclipse of traditional sovereignty”. A new colonization of humanity following a trail of years to usher in a better world or Bleak House. Hope springs eternal. Unless this becomes infernal.
“
So insightful beyond words. The “railing with a clenched fist and a stack of Plato” a memorable image. I see Postman as a postal carrier of wisdom bringing correspondence of awareness to us for contemplation. Your “from typographical seriousness to televisual spectacle”…”no longer asking”…”Is it true?” but “Is it entertaining?” bringing a loss of trust in what we are fed and then the callousness to truth develops, for who knows? And “what kind of mind does the medium make of me?” “To read Postman is to be reminded that rational discourse is not natural to human beings; it must be built, ritualized, sustained. And it can be lost.” This is a call to arms for arming ourselves with active engagement we create and time for friends who prefer the meaningful to the mundane and the truth not the spin.
Exactly Cathie. thank you. Once we substitute "entertaining" for "true," a "loss of trust" and the subsequent "callousness to truth" is inevitable. It is exactly that shift that makes active, conscious engagement, the "call to arms", our only viable defense.
"...the contrast between Orwell and Huxley. Orwell feared the suppression of information; Huxley feared its glut. Orwell’s nightmare was the Ministry of Truth; Huxley’s was the feelies. Postman’s wager was simple: Huxley was right".
I think both were right.
.
"We would not need an iron boot stomping on a human face, we would beg for our chains, provided they came with a laugh track".
We're getting both, and the combination is devastating.
.
"America, he argued, had crossed from a technocracy (where tools serve human ends) into a technopoly, where tools define what human ends are".
A sensation reminiscent of drowning.
.
"Only the stubborn hope that education, real education, not job training or screen time gamification, might help".
To accomplish this, and I believe it's urgent that we do, we need to somehow break the chokehold of laissez faire, zero sum, winner take all capitalism.
I appreciate you pushing back on the simplicity of the Huxley vs. Orwell wager. Viewing our current state as a tragic synergy, a "devastating" combination of suppression and addiction, is acutely accurate.
And I wholeheartedly agree with your final thought: the chokehold of winner-take-all capitalism is the highest barrier to Postman's solution. "Real education" requires stillness, attention, and value placed on long-term insight, none of which are rewarded by a zero-sum, attention-driven economy. Promoting true education means advocating for a structure where human wisdom, not profit, is the primary goal. We can't fix the epistemology without addressing the underlying economics that weaponize the technology.
That's the long term war humanity's been waging since the dawn of civilization. What we call "civilization" itself was created in a most savage way - when one man dominated over thousands, even millions - of others. This lasted for centuries until along came the Constitution to put some (rather weak) constraints on excessive power, and institute a form of power sharing.
It was a great experiment while it lasted, but was deeply flawed, as exemplified by the current upheaval we're facing today.
Depending on which way things go, this could be the beginning of the end, or a new beginning. The masses have been rather quiescent the past few decades, but that's finally changing. Where it will take us is unpredictable, but there is potential for us to finally move closer promoting wisdom over an extra buck for those who don't even need it.
Unfortunately, I agree that the quiescence of the past few decades seems to be ending, which makes the outcome truly unpredictable. The fundamental conflict remains the same, as you suggest: promoting wisdom (Postman's goal) over the extra buck (the core drive of the current Technopoly). The key is directing that shifting energy toward reclaiming the capacity for deep thought and critical citizenship.
That will be a neat trick. Those who typically rise to positions of sufficient power to move masses rarely have the masses best interests at heart. Even if/when we succeed at taking down this emerging autocracy, we can only hope that whoever fills the resulting power vacuum will act on our behalf.
I hope so. Years ago I read "What Got You Here Won't Get You There" a
Book by Marshall Goldsmith... it was a wake up call for executives, but i think rarely read by leaders today.
And one of the best places for interesting conversations, minus the blotting paper of images, I have found is in the waiting line at the Supermarket, in the waiting rooms, meeting the postman at one's letterbox, the next door neighbour...
I look to the future and foresee a time when 'words' go the way of cash...slowly disappearing and being replaced by credit cards.
Credit cards of a certain limited amount allowable for grunts, stunned looks, mangled english expressions of C'rap' graffiti and clichés...striving to communicate.
A bleak future depicting the Tower of Babel's proliferation of strange noises...
It is true, I also discover in 'waiting lines' the vital role of un-optimized, spontaneous space in fostering real discourse. These are the precious few places left where people are extracted from the "blotting paper of images" and forced into shared reality. Rational public discourse is not natural; it requires effort.
If the cultural gravity pulls us toward linguistic credit cards instead of the rich, complex 'cash' of words, we are indeed heading toward a Tower of Babel built not of strange noises, but of endless, empty clichés.
Solid points, thank you.
No, thank you...
Really enjoy reading your posts...
It's what I would expect from good newspapers...articles that make one think, reflect and take action on...
Alas, good newspapers they are no more...the space is now filled with wannabe influencers...influenza of regurgitated pop ideas.
Your articles have caused me an explosion of book purchases I have yet to read, on top of my back catalogue on Lit.
So many books, so little time...
I also think both were right.
Beautiful summary of a beautiful mind, thank you. Large parts of the essay overlap with 6-month old episode of Undivided Attention (The Man Who Predicted the Downfall of Thinking, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPr9h-yb1rU).
Too often I see reading and writing as the only path forward out. I disagree. I grew up reading a lot... inside videogames. They weren't shooters, but point and click adventure games, they were economic simulators and city builders, and ultimately massive online games. While the level of the prose was kept at the young adult level (which I was) and made visually digestable like a script of a movie, it made me interested in learning. And active participation by play promoted curiosity for life.
This is to say new media can work very well and move us forward in an unexpected direction. I for one am happy I don't have to remember my friends phone number. That my taxi driver doesn't know every street and hotel in the city. The simple issue is what we replaced it with - more work, optimized funnel to extract money, without providing meaning beyond the profit. People behind the taxi driver, uber's wheel, and Uber's backoffice are all checked out.
Value-driven generational thinking is a way to prevent Idiocracy.
So true. Postman’s critique isn't a blanket condemnation of new media; it’s a condemnation of media that is epistemologically incompatible with rational public discourse. Active participation, complexity, and systems thinking (like in city builders) promote curiosity and learning. This is a powerful counter-example to the kind of media that just asks us to sit back and scroll.
Fascinating piece, very well articulated overall, the ideas of Postman. Inspired to read his books now. So Thank you