Twitter  At Gannett, questions about how metrics determine coverage  
Nieman Journalism Lab
Pushing to the future of journalism — A project of the Nieman Foundation at Harvard

Attention versus distraction? What that big NY Times story leaves out

Yesterday’s Sunday Times devoted the lead slot of its front page to a long examination of the effects of the web on the attention spans of teenagers. In the tradition (yes, it is now a tradition) of Nick Carr, the piece concludes that, essentially, our smartphones — and our Facebook and our YouTube and our web in general — are robbing kids of their ability to concentrate. Neuroplasticity! “Researchers say the lure of these technologies, while it affects adults too, is particularly powerful for young people,” the piece notes. “The risk, they say, is that developing brains can become more easily habituated than adult brains to constantly switching tasks — and less able to sustain attention.”

Rex Sorgatz summed it up like so: “‘Young people suck.’ –NYT.”

The human face of the epidemic is Vishal Singh, a seventeen-year-old from, naturally, Silicon Valley. “At the beginning of his junior year,” the Times reports, “he discovered a passion for filmmaking and made a name for himself among friends and teachers with his storytelling in videos made with digital cameras and editing software.” But that commitment to creation doesn’t transfer to schoolwork; though Vishal is entering a “pivotal academic year” in his life — his senior year, the year when colleges come calling and thus, ostensibly, futures are decided — he can’t seem to focus on the work he needs to do to do well.

Several teachers call Vishal one of their brightest students, and they wonder why things are not adding up. Last semester, his grade point average was 2.3 after a D-plus in English and an F in Algebra II. He got an A in film critique.

“He’s a kid caught between two worlds,” said Mr. Reilly [Vishal's principal at Woodside High School] — one that is virtual and one with real-life demands.

Two worlds. One real, the other digital. And in the space between them is Vishal — and, by implication, several other wayward members of the world’s first generation of digital natives, the kids who are, per the the piece’s headline, “Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction.” But does that binary — the ‘two worlds’ thinking that pits the virtual realm against the ‘real,’ as if the two were engaged in an epic battle for dominance of that vast land that is Impressionable Youth — really explain what’s going on here? Does it, for example, explain the nail it-to-fail it range of Vishal’s academic performance? Maybe; there’s a chance that his F in Algebra II can indeed be blamed on some unholy union of YouTube/Facebook/Sir Berners-Lee. But, then, if distraction is a diffusive proposition — if it infects all areas of intellectual life indiscriminately, and thus, ostensibly, equally — then how do you explain the A in film critique? (Also: a class in film critique? Perhaps Vishal’s problem is simply that his school is set in a DeLillo novel.)

Attention and distraction

That’s not to discount the attention-fragmenting nature of the web. “Facebook is amazing because it feels like you’re doing something and you’re not doing anything,” Vishal’s best friend, Sam, says in the story, after blaming the site for his inability to finish books and, thus, for his lower-than-desired SAT scores. And a distraction Facebook most certainly is. The question, though, is: distraction from what? And also: What’s inherently wrong with distraction? It seems to me that the real dichotomy here — to the extent, of course, that it’s fair to break any complex problem into reductive dualities — is less a matter of focus vs. distraction, and more a matter of the digital age’s spin-off opposition: interest vs. non-interest. Caring vs…lack of.

We talk a lot about fragmentation in the online world — the unbundling of the news product, the scattering of audiences, the unraveling of publics, etc. And when we do, we tend to focus on the entropic implications of that shift: “Fragmentation,” of course, carries a whiff of nostalgia not just for the thing being fragmented, but for wholeness itself — for completeness, for community, for all that’s been solid. What that framing forgets, though, is that the other side of fragmentation can be focus: the kind of deep-dive, myopic-in-a-good-way, almost Zen-like concentration that sparks to life when intellectual engagement couples with emotional affinity. The narrows, to be Carrian about it, of the niche. And when that kind of focus springs to life — when interest becomes visceral, when caring becomes palpable, when you’re so focused on something that the rest of the world melts away — the learning that results tends to be rich and sticky and sweet. The kind that you carry with you throughout your life. The kind that becomes a part of you. The kind that turns, soon enough, into wisdom.

It’s a kind of learning, though, that can’t be forced — because it relies for its initial spark on something that is as ineffable as it is intense. Interest has a way of sneaking up on you: One day, you’re a normal person, caring about normal things like sports and music and movies — and the next a Beatles song comes on the radio, and suddenly you’re someone who cares not just about sports and music and movies, but also about the melodic range of the sitar. Even if you don’t want, necessarily, to be somebody who cares about the melodic range of the sitar. Interests are often liberating; occasionally, they’re embarrassing. Either way, you can’t control them. They, in fact, control you.

The general and the personal

And that, I’d wager, is the root of Vishal’s academic problems: not that he’s not smart — indeed, again, “one of their brightest students” — and not that he’s the victim of a mass outbreak of web-borne distraction (again, that A in film critique). His problem is both simpler and more serendipitous than that: He just doesn’t care about algebra.

Which is a problem, of course, shared by probably 99.9 percent of the population who have experienced the particular pain of the polynomial. Rare is the person who genuinely likes algebra; rarer still is the person who genuinely, you know, cares about it. But we learn it anyway — because that’s what we’re expected to do. Formal education, as we’ve framed it, is not only about finding ways to learn more about the things we love, but also, equally, about squelching our aversion to the things we don’t — all in the ecumenical spirit of generalized knowledge. We value the straight-A report card not just as a demonstration of indiscriminate ability, but also as evidence of indiscriminate discipline: mastery over apathy. (An A in English and in chemistry! You, little polymath, are prepared for polite society.)

What distinguishes Vishal’s apathy, though — and what makes it more anxiety-inducing than that of the algebraic apatheists in whose footsteps he follows — is that he is coming of age in the digital era. And the digital era is bringing a new kind of empowerment not just to interest, but to aversion. The web is a space whose very abundance of information — and whose very informational infrastructure — trains our attention to follow our interests. And vice versa. In that, it’s empowering information as a function of interest. It’s telling Vishal that it’s better to spend time with video than with Vonnegut — simply because he’s more interested in editing than in reading. Vishal needs needs no other justification for his choice; interest itself is its own acquittal.

And we’re seeing the same thing in news. While formal learning has been, in the pre-digital world, a matter of rote obligation in the service of intellectual catholicism — and news consumption has been a matter of the bundle rather than the atom — the web-powered world is creating a knowledge economy that spins on the axis of interest. Individual interest. The web inculcates a follow your bliss approach to learning that seeps, slowly, into the broader realm of information; under its influence, our notion of knowledge is slowly shedding its normative layers.

For the learner, of course, that is incredibly empowering. One minute, I’m looking up a recipe for spice-roasted sweet potatoes; the next, courtesy of a few link-clicks, I’m learning that sweet potatoes are used for dye in South America, and that there exists such a thing as sweet potato butter. Which is, in a word, awesome. But it also means, on the social scale, a new ability to explore our idiosyncrasies. From Wikipedia to topic pages, from social curation to the explosive little link, the global textbook that is the web takes on a self-guided brand of dynamism, a choose-your-own-adventure proposition fueled by whim and whimsy. It’s a bottom-up shift that our top-down education systems, and journalism along with them, are grappling with. Community, after all, needs the normative to function; the question is where we draw the line between the interest and the imperative. Because as much as we talk about consumers’ desire for a curated information experience — whether on an iPad or within social networks or on the branded pages of the open web — Vishal’s volatility suggests that what we really want from the digital world is something more basic: the permission to be impulsive.

Image by Mike Licht used under a Creative Commons license.

What to read next
Mark Coddington    Aug. 22, 2014
Plus: Controversy at Time Inc., more plagiarism allegations, and the rest of the week’s journalism and tech news.
  • FanOfFocus

    I am not sure I want my doctor’s, pilot’s or home builder’s education ‘fueled by whim and whimsy’.

    Can you really say with a straight face that the ‘New Digital Age’ will take away the need for people to be able to focus on a task or job that is not ‘fueled by whim and whimsy’. Can you promise the students of today that they will never need the skill to buckle down and work hard on something that doesn’t interest them?

  • Pingback: Popular on Twitter: Medill’s name-change, the future of data journalism, the touchy Tumblr » Nieman Journalism Lab

  • Stuarte Harris

    “permission to be impulsive”

    Helloooooo – in case you hadn’t noticed, the consumer economy has relied on our increasing impulsiveness for decades now.

    Who needs permission to be impulsive when we see everywhere “buy now”, “quick, easy, affordable”, “why wait?”

  • Nicole

    I am so happy to see that I’m not the only one not buying into the big NY Times’ words of wisdom. I totally agree with the NY Times that the web poses distractions. Aside from being a teacher, I am part of the web generation, though the earlier part. I started with AIM in middle school. I was on Facebook when Facebook was only accepting universities on a case by case basis. While I am definitely a multi-tasker, I always accomplish what I need to accomplish (thus my ability to go on for doctoral degree). And, here’s the real kicker– sometimes these so-called “distractions” enhance my learning or prompt me to think about things from new angles.

    The world is changing. That’s fact. It’s not ruining what was; it’s simply moving on. We don’t write like the Romantics anymore, not because we can’t enjoy or appreciate what they write, but because that is simply not the world we live in.

    Heaven forbid a teacher can’t control what a student learns or has to work harder to keep the attention of the class.

  • Pingback: Attention versus distraction? What that big NY Times story leaves out » Nieman Journalism Lab « Net Self

  • RJ Johnson

    “Our notion of knowledge is slowly shedding its normative layers.” What does this have to say about a college education in the coming years, especially as we move into a more project-based, temporary workforce? Will we move more toward personally defining and choosing what we need to learn rather than the degrees that have been required for entry to the workforce?
    Best regards,
    RJ Johnson

  • rebellious youth

    As someone with ADD, I found this whole frame difficult to take seriously. (Loved the apocalyptic tale of the 17-year-old who didn’t finish his summer reading assignment. From what I can recall, few of us did.)

    Props to Nicole above. She nailed it.

    Like any habit, online reading practices do become ingrained. But if that laptop/BlackBerry met the business end of a sledgehammer, or people changed their habits, most of them would adjust accordingly.

    The connection between journalism and formal education feels kind of forced. I mean, reading experiences differ by individual. It probably depends on your perspective. But having been more temperamentally unsuited to top-down education than most (and skipped out of more detentions than anyone I know), I think you’re dealing with apples and oranges there. At least to some extent.

  • rudy

    Always, always, always apologizing for the Great Web. Great Web can do no wrong. Great Web is the future. Pay no mind to that man behind the curtain. Worship the Great Web.

  • Pingback: I Lettori Ricordano Meglio un Articolo Scritto su Carta « Il Giornalaio

  • Pingback: Attention Versus Distraction? What That Big NY Times Story Leaves Out | Megan Garber | Voices | AllThingsD

  • Pingback: A Lesson About Learning: Attention Versus Distraction?

  • MsDonna0711

    Psychology 101: Cognitive; the article is true not matter where it’s posted. Simple behavior modification techniques applied here. And NO we don’t have to remain impulsive to be productive. Great concept to apply…’thinking for change’. Life is well spent in real time, not fast forward.

  • Shullamuth

    The world has changed and education needs to change with it. The idea that that the only way to teach kids perseverance and self discipline is to cram them into the same generalized mold and squeeze till they shape up, is not only outdated, it implies that that old factory method helped kids learn. Really,it either indoctrinated them to compliance, or bounced them out.

    In a democracy, it’s a dreadful and dangerous idea to imagine that only the obedient deserve education.

  • Chris Hill

    Great story. Has Vishal been tested for dyslexia? That was my problem with Algebra before existed. The D in English could be more to point about distraction and self discipline, but not unique to the distractions of today. A teenager can equally be distracted from sports, hobbies, and a bad home life. What’s new?

    NYT published a story that supports the Opinions of their Baby Boomer subscribers. That’s what they do well.

    Edelman Digital is more likely to have a relevant story about teens and the internet.

  • Dani Fankhauser

    On the point about going from a sweet potato recipe to discovering sweet potato butter – learning through grazing develops knowledge that is a mile wide and an inch deep.

    But in today’s age, when questions can be answered by a Google search, do we need in-depth knowledge?

  • Katherine

    Although following one’s interests can be valuable, the ability to accomplish goals still matters.

    Jobs may be interesting or even trendy, but no workplace is endlessly entertaining. If people get used to selecting only the activities they like, they won’t be able to accomplish much in the long run. Even people who are self-employed doing work they love still have to file their taxes.

    And there are other things that take patience too… like learning sports, raising kids, and doing many other things one can’t accomplish through a Google search.

  • Jack Henry

    The Community will choose its standards for acceptance and success. Will Vishal’s myopic impulsiveness doom him to making movies and videos that simply mimic other movies and videos? Will he be judged harshly by the community he seeks approval from? Or will he be competitive and succeed within his chosen social structure? It doesn’t really matter. It’s his own impulsive journey to take.

  • Nic

    It is incorrect to say “Sir Berners-Lee”. He is Tim Berners-Lee, and you should say “Sir Tim”, or “Sir Tim Berners-Lee”. Sorry this adds nothing to the discussion bar a moment for education in a distracted world.

  • Pingback: Reefer Madness! « (Re)Structuring Journalism

  • Pingback: Straight-A students? A thing of the past « iGen

  • Pingback: LSDI : Un articolo su carta si ricorda meglio di quello su iPad

  • Pingback: Growing Up Analog, Wired by Distraction « e-lighthouse

  • Justin Coetzee

    Great post. I take it further in my latest blog entry ( by proposing that iGen are not distracted by technology, but are actually the most focussed generation of all – thanks to technology.

    Allyson Miller, quoted in the NYT article sends 27000 text messages a month. That is 1 every waking minute! She isn’t distracted from texting – which is her priority and what she cares about.

    The departure point of the NYT article is incorrect – iGen are the most focussed generation ever – just focussed on different things to what they “should be”.

  • Dana Watts

    One of our goals as educators is to figure out new ways to approach learning in our classrooms to engage our students so that they are creating content instead of consuming it. When I sit in classrooms today, my wish is to be challenged. Why would our students feel any differently?

  • Pingback: Engaging, not Distracting, the Digital Generation: Responding to the Times’ Wired piece « 21k12

  • Pingback: Straight-A students? A thing of the past « iGen Tribe

  • Pingback: links for 2010-11-28 « Ghost Executive Group

  • Pingback: Attention versus distraction? What that big NY Times story leaves out » Nieman Journalism Lab | Erika Harrison

  • Pingback: This Week in Review: Making sense of WikiLeaks, a Daily tablet paper, and Gawker leaves blogging behind » Nieman Journalism Lab

  • Pingback: attention, engagement and the new generation | ruffl

  • Pingback: noam chomsky on education | ruffl

  • Pingback: Connecting & Interacting | learning2learn

  • Pingback: Arduino // Zach Seward

  • Pingback: The Best Tech Writing of 2010 | Writing to Success

  • abd al Shakur

    “The web inculcates a follow your bliss approach to learning that seeps, slowly, into the broader realm of information; under its influence, our notion of knowledge is slowly shedding its normative layers.”

    One word: Narcissism!

    Eradicate rampant narcissism.

  • Pingback: Straight-A students? A thing of the past | iGen Tribe

  • David

    The author makes WAAAAYY too much of that single A in a class in which the instructor probably has long given up grading on grammar, spelling and punctuation. All you need to know about young people you can get from observing them in the workforce – and it isn’t good news.

  • Komal Hayyat

    hum psycology bhut muskil h yarrr………………………….

  • Komal Hayyat

    Helloooooo – in case you hadn’t noticed, the consumer economy has relied on our increasing impulsiveness for decades now.