Forget Attention Deficit Disorder, Has The Internet Created Attention Surplus Order?
from the doubtful dept
It's become fairly common accepted wisdom that we're living in a world where attention deficit disorder, short attention spans and quick hits rule the day -- often (they say) due to technology. There are those, of course, who claim this is a good thing; that it helps many people learn to break up activities into tiny discreet segments, allowing them to better multitask. However, there are also those who take the contrarian point of view. Digg points us to a blog post by Seamus McCauley, echoing some of Steven Johnson's reasoning in his book Everything Bad is Good for You that the internet has actually lengthened our attention span. McCauley's piece is actually in response to Tim O'Reilly discussing how there's now a premium on short-form content and Nick Carr whining about how this devalues the long form. McCauley's point, though, is that this doesn't seem to be true at all. Before the internet, he notes, TV series were all episodic. Each episode could mostly stand on its own, and if you missed an episode here or there, you'd be okay. However many of today's most popular TV series, from Lost to 24 have an involved story arc, where it's tougher to pick things up in the middle, or to miss an episode. However, it's thanks to the internet that people often don't have to miss an episode (though, to be fair, DVRs probably can take an even bigger chunk of the credit). People can pick up what they missed by a download using bittorrent, or by watching the clips on YouTube, or pick up story summaries from various blogs or discussion groups. The real issue isn't that the long form has been devalued (it hasn't), but that if you're going to use the long form, you need to have a good short form hook to get people interested, and then feel free to let all that short form media continually promote the long form.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Errrr
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DVDs are what did it for me
(not one that I made using a DVR or torrent as source either)
Interestingly, episodic shows don't do anything for me. I much prefer a show that tells a nice long story, and takes its time doing it. And being able to buy the dvd collection of the show and watch each episode, in order, at my leisure, without commercials, is a godsend.
What I do find annoying tho, is all the "other crap" the studios insist on putting on the DVDs. (not to mention the 5 minutes it takes to actually get to the main menu. stuff like that just keeps me from ever wanting to watch the content again)
Even my kids prefer their tv shows that way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Granted it's nothing like Lost or 24, which are brilliant in that aspect. They create a buzz but in order to be "in" with the buzz you have to watch every week.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Focusin
For example--instead of spending 60 seconds looking something up in a dictionary or encyclopedia, I spend 30 minutes following a trail of links from a Wikipedia entry. Also, we can use RSS, custom searches, and other aggretation tools to lavish tremendous amounts of attention to topics that interest us--without the effort it once took to seek these things out.
If you're 14 years old and interested in 1970s prog-rock, you can obsess about it for hours on the web instead of digging through musty boxes of vinyl. Ditto for movie buffs who want to see every film by a particular director/actor/etc...Netflix anyone?
In these senses, "paying attention" actually takes less effort than it used to--for better or worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Focusin
For example--instead of spending 60 seconds looking something up in a dictionary or encyclopedia, I spend 30 minutes following a trail of links from a Wikipedia entry. Also, we can use RSS, custom searches, and other aggretation tools to lavish tremendous amounts of attention to topics that interest us--without the effort it once took to seek these things out.
If you're 14 years old and interested in 1970s prog-rock, you can obsess about it for hours on the web instead of digging through musty boxes of vinyl. Ditto for movie buffs who want to see every film by a particular director/actor/etc...Netflix anyone?
In these senses, "paying attention" actually takes less effort than it used to--for better or worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
note necessarily a new idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What?
The cliff-hanger serials existed to get people to keep coming back to the movies. It made kids all the more antsy to see a new movie because they knew the next episode of the serial would play before it started, so they'd be likely to go to see movies they were not as interested in. With the current entertainment choices of several hundred channels, movies on demand, web downloads, etc., entertainment companies are just going back to such things to try and keep an audience. The technology isn't the driving force, it's the attempt to capture the audience.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Having a short atention span is far different from having ADD (indeed many cases get misdiagnosed as ADD when they are not). ADD and ADHD are a difference in brain structure and chemistry (which has advantages as well as disadvantages, in a similar manner to the autistic spectrum). ADD is believed to be inherited (and anecdotally myself, my father, my fathers sister, and their father all have ADD), rather than environmental, and when a short attention span or behavioral dysfunction occour due to an upbringing to the likes of televisual and internet/videogame based brievity it is very rarely ADD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Counterexamples
But wait, says the anime fan, how do you explain that other places already had a high concentration of arc-based storylines on their TVs before the net came along?
For that matter, if TV series "were all episodic" even just in the US, the existence of soap operas since, um, whenever the soap opera was invented must have been a collective hallucination until recently.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amusing Ourselves to Death
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looking at this ALL WRONG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Attracts people who can't write clear English
Creative spelling and weird punctuation aside, these posts don't make any sense...too busy to proofread I guess.
Guess we're doomed. Aw shit, just when we were getting warmed up, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
blah..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Attention Surplus Disorder
[ link to this | view in chronology ]