

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Living in a world saturated by technology is taking its toll.
What would breaking the machines look like in our time? It feels an impossible question to even ask.
Twenty-three minutes. That's how long it takes for your brain to refocus after shifting from one task to the next. Check your email, glance at a text, and you'll pay for what's called a "switch cost effect."
"We've fallen for a mass delusion that our brains can multitask. They can't," author Johann Hari found out in researching his latest book. We're paying a price for our stolen ability to focus and maybe that's one of the reasons we're falling for autocrats and punting on solving the world's grievous problems.
Hari's book "Stolen Focus: Why You Can't Pay Attention and How to Think Deeply Again" raises all sorts of good questions like this. The book is just out in paperback. Talk about technology, though, and inevitably some smart Alec will bring up the Luddites. "You don't want to stand against progress," that person will say. "You don't want to be a Luddite."
The Luddites ... didn't start by breaking machines. They started by making demands of the factory owners to phase in the technology slowly.
Can we spare a few minutes to focus on Luddites? Read people's historian Peter Linebaugh, or Jacobin writer, Peter Frase; check out a Smithsonian Magazine's feature by Clive Thompson—and you'll find that Luddites weren't backward-thinking thugs, but rather, skilled craftspeople whose lives were about to be wrecked.
Textile cutters, spinners and weavers—before factories came along, those British textile workers enjoyed a pretty good life. Working from home, they had a certain amount of autonomy over their lives. The price for their products was set and published. They could work as much or as little as they liked. Come the early 1800s—war and recession—and machines and factories threatened all of that. The Luddites—a made-up name—didn't start by breaking machines. They started by making demands of the factory owners to phase in the technology slowly. Some proposed a tax on textiles to fund worker pensions. They called for government regulation. Relief from the harms and a fair share of the profits from progress. It was only when they were denied all of that that they started breaking stuff up.
Today, big U.S. social media companies are facing lawsuits. On January 6th, Seattle Public Schools sued TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and YouTube for their negative impact on students' mental and emotional health. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments next month over the protections the tech industry enjoys under the law when their algorithms intentionally push potentially harmful content for profit.
What would breaking the machines look like in our time? I don't know. But if Hari's right, it's not just the quality of our lives that's in danger. It's the state of our minds that's at stake.
You can hear my full uncut conversation with Johann Hari about Noam Chomsky, the subject of his next book—a man with no problem with focus it seems—through a subscription to our free podcast, and watch my scary conversation with Hari at lauraflanders.org.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Twenty-three minutes. That's how long it takes for your brain to refocus after shifting from one task to the next. Check your email, glance at a text, and you'll pay for what's called a "switch cost effect."
"We've fallen for a mass delusion that our brains can multitask. They can't," author Johann Hari found out in researching his latest book. We're paying a price for our stolen ability to focus and maybe that's one of the reasons we're falling for autocrats and punting on solving the world's grievous problems.
Hari's book "Stolen Focus: Why You Can't Pay Attention and How to Think Deeply Again" raises all sorts of good questions like this. The book is just out in paperback. Talk about technology, though, and inevitably some smart Alec will bring up the Luddites. "You don't want to stand against progress," that person will say. "You don't want to be a Luddite."
The Luddites ... didn't start by breaking machines. They started by making demands of the factory owners to phase in the technology slowly.
Can we spare a few minutes to focus on Luddites? Read people's historian Peter Linebaugh, or Jacobin writer, Peter Frase; check out a Smithsonian Magazine's feature by Clive Thompson—and you'll find that Luddites weren't backward-thinking thugs, but rather, skilled craftspeople whose lives were about to be wrecked.
Textile cutters, spinners and weavers—before factories came along, those British textile workers enjoyed a pretty good life. Working from home, they had a certain amount of autonomy over their lives. The price for their products was set and published. They could work as much or as little as they liked. Come the early 1800s—war and recession—and machines and factories threatened all of that. The Luddites—a made-up name—didn't start by breaking machines. They started by making demands of the factory owners to phase in the technology slowly. Some proposed a tax on textiles to fund worker pensions. They called for government regulation. Relief from the harms and a fair share of the profits from progress. It was only when they were denied all of that that they started breaking stuff up.
Today, big U.S. social media companies are facing lawsuits. On January 6th, Seattle Public Schools sued TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and YouTube for their negative impact on students' mental and emotional health. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments next month over the protections the tech industry enjoys under the law when their algorithms intentionally push potentially harmful content for profit.
What would breaking the machines look like in our time? I don't know. But if Hari's right, it's not just the quality of our lives that's in danger. It's the state of our minds that's at stake.
You can hear my full uncut conversation with Johann Hari about Noam Chomsky, the subject of his next book—a man with no problem with focus it seems—through a subscription to our free podcast, and watch my scary conversation with Hari at lauraflanders.org.
Twenty-three minutes. That's how long it takes for your brain to refocus after shifting from one task to the next. Check your email, glance at a text, and you'll pay for what's called a "switch cost effect."
"We've fallen for a mass delusion that our brains can multitask. They can't," author Johann Hari found out in researching his latest book. We're paying a price for our stolen ability to focus and maybe that's one of the reasons we're falling for autocrats and punting on solving the world's grievous problems.
Hari's book "Stolen Focus: Why You Can't Pay Attention and How to Think Deeply Again" raises all sorts of good questions like this. The book is just out in paperback. Talk about technology, though, and inevitably some smart Alec will bring up the Luddites. "You don't want to stand against progress," that person will say. "You don't want to be a Luddite."
The Luddites ... didn't start by breaking machines. They started by making demands of the factory owners to phase in the technology slowly.
Can we spare a few minutes to focus on Luddites? Read people's historian Peter Linebaugh, or Jacobin writer, Peter Frase; check out a Smithsonian Magazine's feature by Clive Thompson—and you'll find that Luddites weren't backward-thinking thugs, but rather, skilled craftspeople whose lives were about to be wrecked.
Textile cutters, spinners and weavers—before factories came along, those British textile workers enjoyed a pretty good life. Working from home, they had a certain amount of autonomy over their lives. The price for their products was set and published. They could work as much or as little as they liked. Come the early 1800s—war and recession—and machines and factories threatened all of that. The Luddites—a made-up name—didn't start by breaking machines. They started by making demands of the factory owners to phase in the technology slowly. Some proposed a tax on textiles to fund worker pensions. They called for government regulation. Relief from the harms and a fair share of the profits from progress. It was only when they were denied all of that that they started breaking stuff up.
Today, big U.S. social media companies are facing lawsuits. On January 6th, Seattle Public Schools sued TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and YouTube for their negative impact on students' mental and emotional health. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments next month over the protections the tech industry enjoys under the law when their algorithms intentionally push potentially harmful content for profit.
What would breaking the machines look like in our time? I don't know. But if Hari's right, it's not just the quality of our lives that's in danger. It's the state of our minds that's at stake.
You can hear my full uncut conversation with Johann Hari about Noam Chomsky, the subject of his next book—a man with no problem with focus it seems—through a subscription to our free podcast, and watch my scary conversation with Hari at lauraflanders.org.