Skip to main content

Offline

Yes, by now we all know that smartphones and social media are doing us harm. How do we harness the benefits of them without the destructive effects.

The book Offline makes 5 main points. If you've only got a minute, here they are:

  • The addictive design keeps us on online platforms longer.
  • The 'brain hacks' disrupt our brain's ability to function.
  • Humans need "real" interaction, and social media does not deliver this.
  • Technoference (digital over-riding direct interactions at the play ground, coffee shop, dinner table) result in something valuable being lost.
  • Speed of the transformation is astounding. 75% of people are connected, with almost half using social media. We have no idea what the long-term effects of this real-life experiment will be.
Going a bit deeper, here are some of my highlights from the book.

So what are side-effects?

According to various studies, the effects can be grouped into the physiological (poor sleep, neural re-wiring, and increased stress), the psychological (reduced mental agility, mental overload, decision fatigue, decreased attention span, reduced creativity, decreased self confidence) and the social (diminished empathy, increased loneliness and reality distortion).

About the self-confidence; people who spend more time on facebook, and who have a higher number of facebook friends that are actually strangers are more likely to feel that others have got better lives.

Should we stop completely?

Surprisingly, the authors say no. "Conscious use towards a positive and focussed goal can do enormous good. Continuous idle use is probably not going to lead anywhere good."

Why is that? It seems the authors figure that the technology delivers great benefits. For those short deliberate purposeful activities, the benefits outweigh the costs. But when the use is aimless, the damaging effects are way worse than any mild entertainment that we might stumble across accidentally.

The information tsunami

Apparently, 90% of all "information" has been created in last 2 years. Our brains can't keep up with that.

The likes of maps and phonebooks used to store the information we couldn't hold in our heads. Technology can be the modern equivalent. However maps and phone books didn't deliberately distract us for hours at a time.

(Sidenote: there was an interesting tangent about how much of our minute-by-minute actions are driven by our subconscious rather than our conscious. It's often that subconscious mind that the 'brain hacks' are targetting.)

Tech companies are there to make money. Often the product they are selling is our time and attention. The more time we waste on their platform the more money they make.

But we're connecting with people

Humans do have a need for relationship and belonging. These needs appear to be met by social media. But not really. We're tricked into thinking we've gotten what we need, but without having actually obtained it. The authors describe it as "like trying to water a plant with a picture of water".

Why does this happen?

Dopamine v Oxytocin

Both of these are brain chemicals that give us good feelings.

Dopamine is a reward-based stimulant often talked about with regards to gambling addicts. It's what makes it so hard for them to walk away from poker machines.

Oxytocin is related to social bonding. It's why it feels so good to get a hug from a loved one. Or as my (real-life) friend explained to me, Oxytocin is what "makes mums love their alien-looking child at birth".

It's fairly obvious which one of these is generated by scrolling social media, and which one is truly helpful to our wellbeing.

The marshmallow test

In the famous marshmallow test, psychologists would leave a child with one marshmallow for five minutes - with the promise that if it remained uneaten, the child could have two marshmallows.

The child's ability to hold out for five minutes was a measure of both impulse control and of the delayed gratification - both of which are good traits to develop.

The authors describe smartphones as a giant marshmallow test but with two major changes. First, we are rewarded for eating now rather than waiting. Second, unlike eating marshmallows, digitally there's almost no limit to how much we can consume.

The authors fear the consequences of this instant gratification. What does it do to people's ability to patiently study for years to become a surgeon, or to learn a musical instrument, or even listen attentively to loved ones?

Brain disruption

We have a limited working memory. The info we receive would overwhelm our brain. So most of it is filtered out and we pay attention to only a small fraction of it. 

Distractions or interruptions make our brain switch channels. This reduces our ability to function and we make more mistakes.

Other life issues

The authors point out how well facebook knows you (based on likes, clicks etc) and their ability to target you with ads. Advertisers can use re-marketing an other tricks to get you to buy more stuff.

Google skews search results based on your profile. At first this seems like a handy feature, but it can also lead to confirmation bias and social polarisation.

So what's the answer?

In the final chapter the authors surprisingly say that devices and social media are OK. Both the authors use them. But the key is to "use them to the extent that you want to, not the extent you are manipulated to".

Their four step plan involves

  1. Writing "life stories" (how you want life to be) about the four zones of life (family life, leisure life, own-time life, work life).
  2. Map your habits. How much time are you on devices and which zone were you in?
  3. Identify triggers and cues (what activities or situations cause you to use your smartphone)
  4. Work out countermoves.

The counter moves may include

  • leave your phone in your bag (maybe even on silent) or at home if you're at the café
  • turn off notifications (they're an on-ramp to wasted time)
  • set a timer for checking emails (so a 5 minute email check doesn't turn into a 45 minute social media scroll)
  • charge outside of the bedroom (so you're not tempted to use smartphone in bed)
  • turn it off when driving (even hands-free slows down driver reaction time)
Overall it's a fascinating book based on lots of research. I barely scraped the surface of the material covered.

Further reading


My review of Digital Minimalism

Read my other book reviews or subscribe to my monthly email for future ones.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

My October challenge

Decluttering can be overwhelming. I've been stuck. Shelves and boxes and drawers full of stuff I should go through but not sure where to start. Aaagh - there's so much of it. The solution? So for myself (and for you if you want) I've developed a strategy. I've picked 31 categories in advance. I plan to tackle one item per day of October. If I miss a few that's OK. The point is to overcome overwhelm. To focus on one thing at a time. To move forward instead of being stuck. My favourite way to declutter is to sell online . (I even wrote a  free ebook of tips for selling online). I also like to recycle or upcycle things. Wanna join in? I've chosen categories where I think most people would have excess. If there's a category you have already dealt with, that's cool. Have a rest day - or go even further in one of the previous areas. The list Ok so here's my plan for this October. Bookmark this post or download the picture of my notes. For each category I ...

The magic of compound growth

Compound Interest. Described by Albert Einstein as the 8th wonder of the world. Many people don't fully grasp its power and miss out on the magic. Here's a quick example For 30 days, would you rather (A) get $100 per day, or (B) get 1 cent doubled every day (ie. 2 cents on day two, 4 cents on day three, 8 cents on day four). Quickly. What's your immediate answer? On intuition, lots of people go for Option A. Why? Because $100 sounds so much more than 1 cent. How do they compare? Do the maths, and Option B wins by miles. By Day 15, the 1 cent per day has grown to $163.84 per day. Over the first 18 days, Option B accumulates $2621.43 (compared to $1800 for Option A). It just snowballs from there. By the final days, Option B is getting millions per day and ends up with a total of $10.7 million. Meanwhile the total for Option A is just $3,000 ($100 x 30 days). (Sidenote: Even if Option A was $100,000 per day, option B would still win.) Life in slow motion Investing can be much ...

The real cost of owning a car

It's been about 10 years since I've owned a car. My wife doesn't own one either. "You must save a lot in petrol" That's one of the frequent reactions when someone discovers we don't own a car. "Of course, but it's just the tip of the iceberg" is the usual theme of my reply. Many people I've talked to just aren't fully aware of the real cost of owning a car. Or even that there are six different costs of owning a car. Six? Really? Yes. Occasionally a work colleague or friend will boast their car only costs $X per week. Of course it turns out only some factors have been counted. Sometimes it's just petrol alone. To some people, that feels like the only cost they pay each week. Why does this matter? You might be questioning the need for a second car in the household (or even having one at all). Or you might just be choosing which car to get next. Either way, to make an informed decision we need proper information. So let's look at...