In June 2010, two authors released books that address each side of this question. In The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains, Nicholas Carr hypothesizes that the Internet is changing our brain pathways – and not to our benefit. Carr cites scientific experiments that show the difference between neural pathways created by reading books and those created by new media. The main difference is that one allows for a deeper understanding of content (books) and one promotes the retention of surface details (new media). Carr believes that people who consume a lot of new media are bombarded with messages, and that these distractions don’t allow them to concentrate and fully understand what they are reading. This inability to focus prevents them from gaining a deep understanding of the content and ultimately promotes ADHD-like symptoms. In simple terms, when we consume new media, we are able to understand ideas, but we don’t go much further than what the surface has to offer.
On the other side of the argument is author Clay Shirky. His book, Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age, posits that new media helps people to connect and create innovative ideas, while also increasing transparency. Shirky believes that new media allows for more collaboration and encourages active participation, as opposed to passive learning. He also feels that the technology encourages the pooling of resources and provides an outlet for people to make a positive impact in the world. So, while new media won’t necessarily make us smarter, it can promote positive change and increase our creativity.
So, what is your take? Based on book sales, it seems that Carr’s is the more popular position. For me, I think the Internet is a great thing, but like too much chocolate cake, it’s not always what’s best for my health and well-being. So for now, when it comes to my reading material, I’ll have my cake, but eat my vegetables, too.