It seems his argument is that information inundation lets stupid ideas live longer than they might otherwise, which is actually pretty wise. It's not necessary to pin it on iPods and XBoxes, but the idea that we need to learn healthy ways to survive information bombardment is neither new nor unwieldy.<p>The historical comparisons are interesting, but I suppose it's one of those questions where technology is available but human nature and morality are lagging.
Here is the text of his speech: <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/05/obama_at_hampton_education_is.html" rel="nofollow">http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/05/ob...</a><p>Let's read that before spending a bunch of effort debating only a single sentence of it.<p>(It didn't take me long to find. It is the speech he planned to give, not a transcript, so there may be some minor differences in the actual address.)
Obama's arguments here remind me of Noam Chomsky's thoughts on sports:<p><i>Sports keeps people from worrying about things that matter to their lives that they might have some idea of doing something about. And in fact it’s striking to see the intelligence that’s used by ordinary people in sports [as opposed to political and social issues].</i><p>So much chatter to distract us from the important issues of the day.
This makes me sad.<p>Despite my political opposition to Obama, I thought that he understood the culture of the "IPod, XBox era." In fact, he leveraged these tools of 'diversion' in his campaign (and did so very effectively).<p>This seems to be the knee-jerk technophobic speech that politicians would have given in the latter half of the 20th Century. Instead of being afraid and resistant to technology (which, as we have seen, is unstoppable anyway), politicians should be encouraging the public to put these technological advances to good use. See: David Cameron's TED talk (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ELnyoso6vI" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ELnyoso6vI</a>).<p>He highlights a significant point in his speech, as tel says. Being able to deal with all of the information is something that we need to cope with. However, placing the blame on the tools is not the way to go.
This speech should not be taken seriously - not because Obama (a) has no idea how to play X Box, or (b) spends all day on his Blackberry, but because his administration has thrown its full weight behind the most toxic aspects of ACTA. Even the name of the treaty is a fraud. So why is he supporting it so aggressively?<p>In this speech, Obama says the world is experiencing a moment of "breathtaking change", and goes on to say "we can't stop these changes... but we can adapt to them."<p>How? By exporting laws that call for $1.92 million fines in response to 24 privately downloaded .mp3s? By allowing the USTA to bully Canada over 'laxity' when the IP laws in question are stricter than our own? (<a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4997/125/" rel="nofollow">http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4997/125/</a>). By threatening Indonesia with the same kind of psychotic economic violence in 'retaliation' for their government's formal support of Open Source? (<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/23/opensource-intellectual-property" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/23/openso...</a>).<p>If this is "adaptation", what was the Opium War? A humanitarian relief mission?<p>I promise you, iPads and X-Boxes are not the problem.
Excellent; that's some of the most intelligent argument in this area I've seen for a while.<p>And it is so true. Look st how much time people spend propogating meme's on facebook. Ok so there is always room for us to enjoy banal stuff - but I feel like it is starting to enroach on our lives.<p>It's like the sivers post from the other day; if only we shared an interesting wikipedia rather than one of those chain emails, conspiracy theories or "questionaires"...
I'm not sure I agree with the implication that said devices are to blame for this sort of thing. A lot of this problem is just as, or if not even more prevalent in old media. One could argue that more convenient Internet access helps solving the problem by allowing people to do fact-checking for themselves. I know I look up points of contention on wikipedia via my phone in a way that just wasn't possible a couple of years ago.
While I support most of the man's political stances, Obama's take on the iPad and console culture is perhaps a smidge hypocritical, given that he is, after all, a known Blackberry addict.
The reaction thus far to the President's comments seem to prove his point. Instead of focusing on any of the more challenging assertions many people latch onto the one easily consumable statement about iPads and Xboxs and ignore the bigger points. Imagine if people devoted the mental resources they use on debating minor details of technology, sports, entertainment, etc to real world issues? Imagine if they ran for office? It would change the world.
Quite Huxleyan of him. This paragraph by Neil Postman is worth cross-referencing:
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World#Comparisons_with_George_Orwell.27s_Nineteen_Eighty-Four" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World#Comparisons_wit...</a>
>"With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, -- none of which I know how to work..."<p>What the hell? This sounds like Bush.<p>What happened to the guy who was in love with his blackberry?