Is Google Making Us Stupid?
I am so glad Rory posted Nicholas Carr’s Atlantic Monthly article, “Google is Making Us Stupid,” to Library Juice. There’s no doubt that technology has a huge impact on how we think. I recall painfully shifting from writing out papers by hand to word processing, and now I hate to think of going back to my old ways. I think we’re all in various stages of transition from reading the printed page to reading the computer screen. I’m still adapting, but I feel that there may come a time when I’ll prefer the screen. Some of it has to do with nostalgia, some is simply about liking the feel of a book or article in one’s hand, but a lot has do with the fact that the brain has to work differently to process information presented on a screen.
My just-turned-four-year-old is a computer whiz…the kid can navigate the web like you wouldn’t believe (well, I’m amazed, at least). And he pretty much masters the rules of games and search techniques by playing around on the computer. I have actually taught him almost nothing about using the Internet. He recently bought a Backyardigans album via iTunes, and I don’t think it was an accident. I’d love to have someone study his brain. Seriously.
My question is this: What does this mean for librarianship? Like Google, librarianship in the U.S. is largely founded on principles of scientific management, thanks mostly to Dewey. This all fits so well with the debates about whether or not libraries are complicit with the dumbing down of America. Are we getting more efficient, or are we just getting stupid?
I have a friend who recently told me that he’s deliberately writing an article that’s difficult to read. He wants people to either read it closely or not at all, and he feels that making it tough will weed out the skimmers. I’m not sure I agree with him, although I see where he’s coming from. The people pleaser in me is more likely to write for an audience, rather than make the audience work for me. Granted, this is academia, but I’m conflicted as a practicing cataloger, too. Should librarians meet the demands of the public or insist on deeper thinking and techniques from users. To what extent is change in cognitive and/or behavioral patterns good or bad or simply change.
Tags: brains, google, technology
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
June 14, 2008 at 3:02 pm
First, xoxo backyardigans.
That said, I was at a friend’s house last night and she was showing me some policy paper from some think tank or other about the declining relevance of print and the complicity of librarians (yes, NYC nightlife is everything you’ve heard it is). I found myself totally angry at the writer. How is this *our* fault?! Did the writer of the article use the print reader’s guide to find that Economist article he cited in the first graf, or did he use a database?! And if the latter, why isn’t he THANKING us? So much of this ‘oh woe is the internet’ stuff strikes me as the worst and basest form of nostalgia. I don’t think there’s anything but good in the ways libraries are using digital technologies to improve access. I just don’t know if it’s our responsibility to ensure that people read. I had a session with a student last semester where I showed her how to use Google Books to keyword search for primary texts about ‘courtesans.’ we came up with some cool results we never would have otherwise found in my 300,000 volume small liberal arts college library and she stared blankly at the screen and said, “But is that about what I need it to be about?” It took some back and forth but eventually I found myself telling her that, well, she had to READ THE TEXT to find out what it was about. Felt crazy.
in my view, libraries are about access, and I think there’s no question our use of these technologies improve access. But i feel at a loss as to what my role might be in terms of facilitating critical engagement with information, particularly as the digital technologies we adopt make our own labor and relevance increasingly invisible. But that’s a whole ‘nother blog post, eh?
June 16, 2008 at 3:21 am
Thanks for reading and commenting, Emily.
I think you’re right on with libraries being about access. And as a cataloger, I see this debate shake out in various forms, particularly on the AUTOCAT listserv. In fact, a conversation about this very article started there today.
Among catalogers the big issues seem to center on the effectiveness v. efficiency of searching and whether or not libraries and their catalogs should follow a business model. My favorite topic is that of subject headings v. keyword searching. Perhaps I will write a more thorough post on that soon. I really haven’t publicly participated in that debate, yet, and it’s about time. Stay tuned.