As social media and now AI dramatically alter how we consume and create information and relate to each other, worries are mounting.
What’s notable is that we’ve been here before. Despite similar handwringing and worries, the Disruptive Innovations in media have ultimately ruled the day—even after accounting for technology’s uneven progress, as the latest Nobel Prize winner in economics, Joel Mokyr, has argued—and we adapted.
Were there losses? Sure. Were some of the losses overstated? Yup. Were there also gains? Undoubtedly.
Although many are currently thinking through if and how to control the impacts from these new media (worthwhile questions), another set of questions revolves around how we might look back upon them with the benefit of hindsight.
In Plato’s Phaedrus, Plato (ironically or not) recorded concerns about the dramatic spread of the written word, which could undermine memory and true understanding. In words widely attributed to Socrates, Plato wrote:
“This discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember themselves.”
Those who read the written word wouldn’t know the “truth,” but only a semblance of it. They would “appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing.”
There’s something to that argument.
Few, if any, among us can recite Homeric-length epic poems today. Even fewer individuals learned most knowledge through rich dialogues with other people that forced them to wrestle with big questions and the limits of their knowledge. What’s more, the written word wasn’t nearly as good as the best of the emotive, expressive, and captivating storytellers in front of you.
But for those who didn’t have access to those experts, it provided something that was better than the alternative: nothing at all. It was also far more convenient and offered other benefits. The Disruptive Innovation of writing allowed for greater access to information, as well as its recall and use across society—classic hallmarks of disruptive innovation—which Plato recognized as well. There was a tradeoff, in other words.
The Disruptive Innovation ultimately carried the day, and few of us can imagine going back.
Fast forward to the Disruptive Innovation of the printing press, which led to the mass production of texts not nearly as beautiful, hand-crafted, or as controlled as those created by monks in the Church, for example.
Again, there was handwringing. The Church and other authorities were—rightly as it turned out—concerned that mass-produced books might spread ideas they couldn’t control. There was a tradeoff, in other words. Yet again, the Disruptive Innovation carried the day—and few of us can imagine going back.
The advent and spread of radio sparked more worries. Rudolf Arnheim, a media theorist and psychologist, worried that it was making individuals too passive due to its one-way nature and removal from the public square, and that, because it centralized communication, it might homogenize local traditions. Others also worried that radio could be used as a tool for propaganda—a fair concern in the 1930s. Of course, radio also had distinct advantages. It provided access to the best talent for news, music, and entertainment. The Disruptive Innovation, complete with all its tradeoffs, carried the day—and few of us can imagine going back.
Television was next. Neil Postman, for example, in his 1985 book Amusing Ourselves to Death, argued that television wasn’t just entertaining us, but was actually changing the way we process information and how we think about the world. He worried about the shift from a print-based culture—which Socrates would’ve found laughable—emphasizing depth and rational argument, to a more visual, entertainment-focused culture, which he thought was shallower. George Gerbner’s research suggested that long-term and heavy exposure to violent television heightened fear, anxiety, pessimism, and depression symptoms.
But of course, television also created other forms of engagement and new kinds of literacy, and things like Sesame Street had a measurable, positive impact. There were once again tradeoffs, in other words. And once again, the Disruptive Innovation carried the day—and few of us can imagine going back.
Video games led to moral concerns about violence and addiction. A prominent lawyer named Jack Thompson, for example, suggested that violent video games posed unique risks to the minds of young people. A lot of research was aimed at establishing links between video games and depression or violence. Brian Primack led research that found that exposure to video games had a mixed track record on health and depressive symptoms, and that how they were used mattered a great deal.
Video games, of course, have also created other forms of social engagement and art. And there has been lots of disruption within the video games category over the past couple of decades. In other words, the handwringing hasn’t halted the Disruptive Innovation, even as it has helped parents and others think about the tradeoffs that come with engaging with the media.
The debate around social media is, of course, alive and well right now. And debates are forming as the adoption of AI large language models (LLMs) grows rapidly. Even as we mourn the passing of the old and raise concerns about the impact, we should also remember that these media will likely foster different kinds of engagement or new forms of literacy.
Indeed, in an example of past being prologue, AI-augmented books may soon support the sort of dialogue and active learning that Socrates supported.
John Kaag, a philosophy professor at UMass Lowell, for example, is the cofounder of Rebind Publishing, an e-reading experience that offers AI-chat functions to allow readers to engage with top scholars of works that range from Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations to James Joyce’s Ulysses. In Rebind Publishing’s words, reading was “never meant to be a solitary practice, but rather an occasion to converse, engage, and connect. … Dynamic video interviews with Rebind experts add rich context and insights while you read, creating a guided, immersive experience.”
As the Disruptive Innovation of AI grows, the worries of dumbing us down and isolating us will be nothing new. And there will be real tradeoffs. But there will also be some unexpected delights. Either way, the Disruptive Innovation is likely to keep on marching.
