The popular use of a term
sometimes differs from its original use. Such is the case with Luddite, which
now usually refers to someone who fiercely opposes most technology. Blood in the Machine by Brain Merchant
(Little Brown, 2023) takes us back to the term’s origin: the Luddite Movement
in England from 1811 to 1816.
Textile
workers were opposed to certain types of automated machines, not
wholesale opposition to all technology. They also believed that employers
deceived them about manufacturing changes. The workers damaged some factory
machines, but eventually lost their battle when military force was used against
them.
In our
day, some tech companies warrant resistance over their treatment of employees
and consumers. Those companies include the social media--Meta (Facebook), Tik
Tok, and X (Twitter) and others. Plus, the big tech retail giant Amazon and
probably the app-based delivery/rider companies.
The
harmful side effects of these companies derive from their operating philosophy,
as summarized by Adrienne LaFrance in “The Despots of Silicon Valley” for The Atlantic (3/24). The authoritarian
titans of tech are dangerous, she writes. They believe “that technological
progress of any kind is unreservedly and inherently good; that you should
always build it, simply because you can; that frictionless information flow is
the highest value regardless of the information’s quality; that privacy is an
archaic concept…[and that] the power [of tech experts] should be unconstrained.”
LaFrance
continues: The tech giants “promise community but sow division; claim to
champion truth but spread lies; wrap themselves in concepts such as empowerment
and liberty, but surveil us relentlessly.”
Our
Congress is concerned about the side effects of big tech. Both House and Senate
routinely summon one or another tech executive to address those concerns. Those
hearings are perhaps a modest start. Collective and individual action on the
part of the public is urgently needed. A few groups are on the case. For
example, Collective Action in Tech (www.collectiveaction.tech/unions)
maintains a list of organizing efforts among employees in the big tech sector.
Mothers Unite to Stall Technology (www.mothersunite4kids.org)
advises parents on the harmful effects of mobile devices and more. (Ironically,
these citizen efforts rely on tech platforms to spread their ideas.)
Citizens should keep basic principles in mind.
First, as Jacques Ellul (1912-1994) warns us, all technology individuates.
Contrary to the propaganda of the social media platforms, communication through
mobile devices puts users further apart. One’s so-called friends on Facebook
are likely not genuine friends unless honest and vulnerable face-to-face contact
also occurs. Second, as Marshall McLuhan preaches, “the medium is the message.”
That is, the content is less relevant than the hardware (the device itself, the
satellite and the earthbound transmitters and cables). Merely having a TV in
one’s home changes the household environment, no matter the content of one or
another TV show. A mobile device in one’s pocket changes one’s outlook, no
matter who is texting whom.
These
principles and others should, by the way, cause reflection on the part of
church leaders—particularly those in liturgical denominations. For example, a
camera inside a church in itself makes the worship a little bit more
entertainment and a little less participatory liturgy. Say it this way: There
is no such thing as reality TV or reality streaming. The image from a camera
signal sent up to a satellite and back down to a TV, a computer or a mobile
device is not reality. It is a projection and it necessarily individuates. Be honest: Do you drink coffee or surf
channels while watching TV Mass?
Droel is the author of Public Friendship (National Center for
the Laity, PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629; $6)
