Digital Literacy: A Quantity Perspective
Every decision we make is a purchase – money might not directly exchange hands and no tangible objective product is involved – but values and costs are involved that juxtapose the personal, political, local and global.
For example, by clicking or simply searching for particular news items, stories, information on the internet – and ignoring others, we engage in a process of ‘ value purchasing’. This act of valuing information signals to digital information providers (tech giants, media moguls, retailers, politicians, governments, social influencers) that certain knowledge is more valuable than others. This in turn helps to ‘normalise/ shape’ our values and expectations of the world we live in, our sense of self and our future expectations.
The process of purchasing through valuing and meeting those values with any number of products including information (ideas, opinions, feelings) has been around for millennia; technological developments have ramped up the scale and speed of this process and its consequences.
Valuing quantity over quality impacts upon people the planet and profits. The tragic implosion of the Titan submersible (2023) is a poignant example of quantity value purchasing in action. The implosion of The Titan (the submersible carrying 5 men to the wreck of the Titanic) was covered world wide. There appeared to be an insatiable purchasing power for news on the tragedy; quantity purchasing choices were made by millions globally with some news platforms providing almost round the clock coverage.
Only thousands of nautical miles away from where the Titan was lost another sea tragedy was unfolding – receiving minimal international coverage. The estimate of lives lost when an asylum seeker boat capsized off the Italian coast was between 400 – 700 people. This tragedy warranted minimal news coverage – the world’s attention was firmly on the loss of the Titan ttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/14/scores-drown-refugee-boat-sinks-off-greece.
The loss of hundreds of asylum seeker lives on a fishing boat in the Mediterranean and the loss of the Titan submersible in the North Atlantic are tragic. Equally as tragic is that the former is so normalised by the developed world it isn’t news.
The consequences of instilling value with a ‘free click’ on a news item are profound (for humanity and the planet) as Barack OBama noted in relation to media coverage of the Titan https://www.google.com/search? client=safari&rls=en&q=barack+obama+comments+on+submarine&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:390affea,vid:BlBtAMPz8w4.
“…when the inequality of wealth is so normalised that people are so abhorred that 5 wealthy men can die in a submarine accident that it requires minute to minute media coverage but minimum coverage on the loss of up to 700 lives, because no one is interested in that story, it is very hard to sustain democracy anywhere.“
I am sure those clicking on media sites covering the sinking of the Titan and the death of 5 men would not connect their actions to the survival of democracy. Yet this is what they were doing: placing a value on a particular perspective of the world and negating others.
In the cut and thrust of accelerated growth and GDP it is expedient and financially viable (in the short term) to encourage people to think fast and purchase fast (to make quantity choices) regardless of their values: fast degrees, fast food, fast sports (to learn) are the progeny of a society that values quantity over quality and economic growth as the panacea for everything from personal happiness to world peace. Economic growth equals ALL GOOD https://data.oecd.org/gdp/gross-domestic-product-gdp.htm#:~:text=Gross%20domestic%20product%20(GDP) %20is,and%20services%20(less%20imports).
The behavioural pattern associated with our quantity choices affords us the luxury of putting the responsibility for making them elsewhere. After all, we are simply ‘Clicking’ on an item not directly interacting with the consequences of our decisions: all care no responsibility is how quantity choices roll.
Quantity choices demand quantity resources and planet earth’s resources are finite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvon_Chouinard. In his Witness Statement to planet’s earth exponential demise through catastrophic losses in global biodiversity, Attenborough (2021) reflects on humanity’s (especially the developed world’s) desire and expectation of perpetual economic growth.
Nick Bostrom’s (2016) statistical projections of world economic growth in terms of how quickly the world economy, powered by technology, will increase on a daily basis in the latter half of the C21 (if left unfettered) are frighteningly ineffable. Why? They are unsustainable, unequally distributed, based on a trim labour market and an overwhelming dependence on technology – all of which are key players in the breakdown of democracy and planet Earth.
Attenborough (2021 p169) places some faith in innovative inventions, agile progressive responsible businesses, passionate people, Green Growth, Environmental Economics (the circular/ sustainable economy) the Sustainable Revolution (a distant relative of the Industrial Revolution) the Happy Planet Index and a commitment to the 3 P’s (people, planet, profit) over the GDP.
There are those who hope for a future in which humankind globally detaches itself from its addiction to growth, moves on from GDP as the be-all and end-all, and becomes focused upon a new, sustainable measure of success that involves all three P’s.
Attenborough’s (2021 p170) faith is tempered by the reality that leaders of the developed world will have to convince populations:
“[Who have] benefitted from unsustainable growth [that] maintaining a good standard of living [is possible] while radically reducing their footprints. Poorer nations have the very different challenge of radically raising their standard of living in a ways that’s never been done before – whilst achieving a sustainable revolution.”
In both instances sustainable action (benefitting the 3 P’s) requires humanity to make value decisions based on quality (across the life cycle) not quantity choices. How does humanity (globally) achieve this 180 degree shift in consciousness in the next decade?
The future’s so bright I gotta wear Quality Lenses
As I was writing this I was thinking of the lyric from Timbuk 3’s 1986 hit, “The future’s so Bright, I gotta wear shades.” http://(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qrriKcwvlY)
What choices would you make if you could purchase shades that allowed you a peek into a future you created?
Standard Future Lenses will offer select Future Options eg., billionaire entrepreneur; tech hacker; criminologist; tradesperson; scientist; robotics engineer; 3 children, no children, different geographical location options, vehicle options, housing options and so on: an augmented reality take on the proverbial crystal ball. Top of the range will be customised lenses allowing the buyer to create their own future – or maybe several.
-
Plug-in ideas about what future you would like to create for yourself and your nearest and dearest
-
Pop on shades fitted with future lenses
-
See what your customised future might look like.
Future lenses will not include algorithms for reality checks; they will construct what we want to see from information garnered from our irreverent click histories, on the spot purchases (failing to note our buyer’s remorse) and latest trend searches.
The greater the quantity of click histories the more diverse and colourful futures our Future Lenses will provide for us, creating a potential future scenario where large swathes of humanity loose touch with reality altogether, because they prefer the realities shown by the Future Lenses – a bit like valuing the loss of the Titan and 5 wealthy individuals and devaluing the loss of up to 700 asylum seekers; most people would be horrified at that suggestion yet the same people would absently Click on information/news sites that signify to information providers exactly what I have suggested – constructing a world were our values and actions rarely align and our mental health, planet and bottom line pay dearly for this misalignment.
The example of the Future Lenses highlights the role technology can play in supporting quantity choices: imagine companies paying obscene amounts of money to advertise (in go native fashion) their product on your futures’ shades? If it is a future you like you might make quantity purchasing choices reflecting the experiences / products you saw when wearing your preferred Futures’ shades.
Quantity choices use resources – from production to landfill: Chouinard and Stanley’s book, The Responsible Company – offers sobering examples of resource consumption by the retail clothing industry (2012). Characteristics like expedience, accessibility, poor quality, use once/throw away dominate the quantity choice market. Democracy, a stable climate and sturdy global social system do not go hand in hand in a world where resources are finite and personal values and actions rarely align.
What if (based on our interaction with technology) our Future Lenses provided a future perspective for our significant others – partners, children, friends, family ? Would we like what we saw? Would we make connections between our interactions with technology, our value judgements, the lives of our significant others and big picture issues? Would we embrace the futures we created or would we at best be concerned and at worst abhorred at our life style decisions, including the global consequences of these decisions?
What if our Future Lenses highlighted the consequences of our decisions for ourselves, our loved ones, the global village and planet, then allowed us to make different choices and see different futures? Would such experiences allow us to create (through making different real life decisions) a different future – one we felt proud of? A future aligned with our values; a future that we connected too and could discuss with our nearest and dearest helping them make quality choices too. A future that supported our:
-
mental health
-
planet
-
local and global social systems
-
relationship with technology
-
businesses.
Digital Literacy: A Quality Perspective
Climate Scientist, Dr Joelle Gergis (2022 p 110) cites Pope Francis’ message to stress the importance of involving EVERYONE in discussions and actions relating to climate, social, technological change:
We need a conservation which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots [social change] concern and affect us all …
Technology’s ability to provide accessible platforms with global reach is undisputed, as is its role as an influencer (in any form). To use these exceptional capabilities to enable human populations globally to influence and create individual and collective future change (that benefits the 3P’s and connects to people on a personal level) is a quality decision; as is the decision to support the creation of a platform that enables this. It is grass roots activism as its best; it is responsible progressive business at its best; it is C21 leadership at its best (Rugg 2019).
With the advent of technologies like SOLID and its personalised PODs opportunities exist to develop technological platforms that support people to explore privately (from primary school to octogenarian) how their current choices (across the life cycle) from purchasing a pet to purchasing clothing, travelling to school to pursuing a hobby influence issues like Climate, Technological and Social Change (locally and globally) and simultaneously comprehend how the latter impact upon personal issues (eg family, employment, intimate relationships, education, mental and physical health, travel) http://11 https://www.cmswire.com/digital-experience/how-to-set-up-solid-pods-a-data-ownership-guide/. Such a platform provides a level, inclusive and safe playing field for collaboration between anyone and everyone eg:
fossil fuel giants and activists
Retailers and consumers
Supporters of the GDP and the Happy Planet Index
School children and professors
Renewables and populations impacted by their presence
Chemical companies and organic producers
Industrialists, farmers, governments
IMF, OECD, World Bank, WHO and remote villages
Democratic governments and dictatorships
Software developers and NPO’s
Fiscal and Environmental Economists
The development of an innovative and collaborative technological platform that enhances opportunities for greater proportions of humanity to develop levels of learning agility capable of spearheading transformations across every aspect of the social world eg family life, labour markets, tourism, retail, government, housing, defence, health care, sport, construction industries, education, agriculture is a quality choice, because it makes a shift in human consciousness possible, accessible to anyone with access to a mobile device and provides options for collaborative action (activism in any context – retail outlet, school playground, fossil fuel board room) and/or private reflection. It creates a platform for the genesis of‘ Humanity’s Moment’ (Gergis 2022)
These actions and reflections will be crucial to mitigating the impact of Planet Earth’s increasingly unstable climatic and social systems and contributing to a form of governance that listens to and leads a globally educated public in the transition from economies grounded in the GDP to ones embedded in the 3 P’s. This is a quality choice, at its heart is Quality in the form of technological innovation, human genius, leadership. The outcome?
The future gets so bright we will all have to wear shades and responsible, collaborative, innovative, agile and progressive businesses will create them … 😎🕶
References
Attenborough D (2021) A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and A Vision for the Future
Bostrom N (2016) Super Intelligence, Paths, Dangers, Strategies
Chouinard Y and Stanley V (2012) The Responsible Company: What we’ve learned from Patagonia’s first 40 years
Gergis J (2022) Humanity’s Moment, A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope
Rugg S (2019) How Powerful We Are