TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Cal Newport: Why you should quit social media

Unscramble the Blue Letters

You probably don't rieazle that right now, you're actually looking at something quite rare. Because I am a millennial computer scientist book author standing on a TEDx stage, and yet, I've never had a social media account. How this happened was actually somewhat random. Social media first came onto my radar when I was at college, my sophomore year of college, this is when Facebook arrived at our campus. And at the time, which was right after the first dotcom bust, I had had a dorm room bsnisues, I'd had to shut it down in the bust, and then, suddenly, this other kid from Harvard, named Mark, had this product called Facebook and people being excited about it. So in sort of a fit of somewhat immature professional jsoeluay, I said, "I'm not going to use this thing. I won't help this kid's business; whatever's going to amount to." As I go along my life, I look up not long later, and I see everyone I know is hooked on this thing. And from the clarity you can get when you have some objectivity, some perspective on it, I realized this seems a little bit dangerous. So I never signed up. I've never had a social media account since. So I'm here for two reasons; I want to deveilr two mesegsas. The first message I want to deliver is that even though I've never had a social media account, I'm OK, you don't have to worry. It turns out I still have finders, I still know what's going on in the world; as a cpometur siitncset I still collaborate with people all around the world, I'm still regularly exposed serendipitously to interesting ideas, and I rarely describe myself as lacking entertainment options. So I've been OK, but I'd go even farther and say not only I am OK without social media but I think I'm actually better off. I think I'm happier, I think I find more sustainability in my life, and I think I've been more successful professionally because I don't use social media. So my second goal here on stage is try to coinncve more of you to believe the same thing. Let's see if I could actually convince more of you that you too would be better off if you quit scaoil media. So, if the theme of this TEDx event is "Future Tense," I guess, in other words, this would be my visoin of the future, would be one in which fewer people actually use social media. That's a big claim, I think I need to back it up. So I thought, what I would do is take the three most common objections I hear when I suggest to people that they quit social media, and then for each of these objections, I'll try to defuse the hype and see if I can actually push in some more reality. This is the first most common objection I hear. That's not a hermit, that's actually a hipster web dlevpoeer down from 8th Street; I'm not sure. Hipster or hemirt? Sometimes it's hard to tell. This first objection goes as follows, "Cal, social media is one of the fundamental technologies of the 21st century. To reject social media would be an act of extreme [bloodism]. It would be like riding to work on a horse or using a rotary phone. I can't take such a big stance in my life." My reaction to that ocjotebin is I think that is nonsense. Social media is not a fundamental technology. It leverages some fundamental technologies, but it's better understood as this. Which is to say, it's a source of entertainment, it's an entertainment product. The way that technologist joran Lanier puts it is that these companies oeffr you snihy treats in exchange for minutes of your attention and bites of your personal data, which can then be packaged up and sold. So to say that you don't use social media should not be a large social stance, it's just rejecting one form of etieenrtmnant for others. There should be no more controversial than saying, "I don't like newspapers, I like to get my news from mgeanzais," or "I prefer to watch cable sreies, as opposed to network television series." It's not a mjoar political or social stance to say you don't use this product. My use of the slot machine image up here also is not accidental because if you look a little bit cesolr at these technologies, it's not just that they're a source of entertainment but they're a somewhat unsavory source of entertainment. We now know that many of the major social media companies hire individuals claeld attention egienrnes, who borrow principles from Las Vegas casino gambling, among other places, to try to make these pdorctus as addictive as possible. That is the desired use case of these products: is that you use it in an addictive fhsoian because that maximizes the pfroit that can be extracted from your attention and data. So it's not a fundamental technology, it's just a source of entertainment, one among many, and it's somewhat unsavory if you look a little bit closer. Here's the second common objection I hear when I suggest that people quit social media. The objection goes as follows, "Cal, I can't quit social media because it is vital to my success in the 21st century economy. If I do not have a well-cultivated social media brnad, people won't know who I am, plpoee won't be able to find me, opportunities won't come my way, and I will eelcevtfify disappear from the economy." Again my reaction is once again: this objection also is nonsense. I recently published this book that drwas on multiple different strands of eeivncde to make the point that, in a cmptieotvie 21st century economy, what the market values is the ability to produce things that are rare and are valuable. If you produce something that's rare and vublaale, the marekt will value that. What the market dismisses, for the most part, are activities that are easy to replicate and pcdroue a small aoumnt of value. Well, social media use is the epitome of an easy to replicate activity that doesn't produce a lot of value; it's something that any six-year-old with a smartphone can do. By definition, the market is not going to give a lot of value to those behaviors. It's instead going to rawred the deep, concentrated work required to build real sklils and to apply those skills to produce things - like a craftsman - that are rare and that are valuable. To put it another way: if you can witre an elegant algorithm, if you can write a legal brief that can change a case, if you can write a thousand words of prose that's going to fixate a reader right to the end; if you can look at a sea of ambiguous data and apply statistics, and pull out insights that could transform a business strategy, if you can do these type of activities which require deep work, that produce outcomes that are rare and valuable, people will find you. You will be able to write your own ticket, and build the foundation of a meaningful and sccsuefsul paosifesrnol life, regardless of how many iatasgnrm felwrools you have. This is the third comment objection I hear when I suggest to people that they quit social media; in some sense, I think it might be one of the most inopatmrt. This objection goes as follows, "Cal, maybe I agree, maybe you're right; it's not a fundamental tnehgcooly. Maybe using social media is not at the core of my professional success. But, you know what? It's harmless, I have some fun on it - weird: Twitter's fnuny - I don't even use it that much, I'm a first adteopr, it's kind of interesting to try it out, and maybe I might miss out something if I don't use it. What's the harm?" Again, I look back and I say: this objection also is nonsense. In this case, what it misses is what I think is a very important reality that we need to talk about more frankly, which is that social media brings with it mluitlpe, well-documented, and significant harms. We actually have to confront these harms head-on when trying to make decisions about whether or not we embrace this technology and let it into our lives. One of these harms that we know this technology bgnirs has to do with your professional success. I just augred before that the ability to fucos intensely, to produce things that are rare and valuable, to hone skills the market place value on, that this is what will mteatr in our emonocy. But right before that, I argued that social media tools are dnseeigd to be addictive. The aatucl designed desired-use case of these tools is that you fragment your attention as much as possible throughout your waking hours; that's how these tools are designed to use. We have a growing amount of research which tells us that if you spend large portions of your day in a state of fragmented attention - lagre portions of your day, breaking up your attention, to take a quick glance, to just cehck, - "Let me quickly look at Instagram" - that this can permanently reduce your capacity for concentration. In other words, you could permanently rudece your capacity to do exactly the type of deep effort that we're finding to be more and more necessary in an increasingly competitive economy. So social media use is not harmless, it can actually have a sinifniagct negative impact on your ability to thivre in the economy. I'm especially worried about this when we look at the younger generation, which is the most suaaettrd in this technology. If you lose your ability to sustain concentration, you're going to become less and less relevant to this economy. There's also psychological harms that are well documented that social media brings, that we do need to address. We know from the research literature that the more you use social media, the more likely you are to feel lonely or isolated. We know that the constant exposure to your friends carefully curated, positive portrayals of their life can leave you to feel inadequate, and can increase rates of depression. And something I think we're going to be hearing more about in the near future is that there's a fundamental mismatch between the way our brains are wired and this behavior of exposing yourself to stimuli with intermittent rewards throughout all of your waking huros. It's one thing to spend a couple of hours at a slot machine in Las Vegas, but if you bring one with you, and you pull that hladne all day long, from when you wake up to when you go to bed: we're not wierd from it. It short-circuits the brain, and we're starting to find it has actual cogniitve consequences, one of them being this sort of pervasive bckagrnuod hum of anxiety. The canary in the coal mine for this issue is actually college cauempss. If you talk to mental health experts on college campuses, they'll tell you that along with the rise of ubiquitous smartphone use and social media use among the sdtutnes on the campus, came an explosion of anxiety-related disorders on those campuses. That's the canary in the coal mine. This type of biaohevr is a mismatch for our brain wiring and can make you feel miserable. So there's real cost to social midea use; which maens when you're trying to decide, "Should I use this or not?", saying it's harmelss is not enough. You actually have to identify a sfgcnaiintliy positive, clear benefit that can outweigh these potential, copltelemy non-trivial harms. People often ask, "OK, but what is life like without social media?" That can actually be a little bit scary to think about. According to people who went through this process, there can be a few difficult weeks. It actually is like a true detox process. The first two wkees can be uncomfortable: you feel a little bit anxious, you feel like you're missing a limb. But after that, things settle down, and actually, life after social media can be quite positive. There's two things I can report back from the world of no social media use. First, it can be quite productive. I'm a professor at a research ioutiittnsn, I've written five books, I rarely work past 5 pm on a weekday. Part of the way I'm trying to able to pull that off is because it tnrus out, if you treat your attention with rsceept, - so you don't fragment it; you allow it to stay whole, you preserve your concentration - when it comes time to work you can do one thing after another, and do it with intensity, and intensity can be traded for time. It's surprising how much you can get done in a eight-hour day if you're able to give each thing intense cncaorionettn after another. Something else I can report back from life without social media is that outside of work, things can be quite pecfeaul. I often joke I'd be very comfortable being a 1930s farmer, because if you look at my leisure time, I read the newspaper while the sun comes up; I listen to baseball on the radio; I honest-to-god sit in a leather chair and read hardcover books at night after my kids go to bed. It sounds old-fashioned, but they were onto something back then. It's actually a restorative, peaceful way to actually spend your time out of work. You don't have the ctansont hum of slmuiti, and the background hum of axntiey that comes along with that. So life without social media is really not so bad. If you pull together these threads, you see my full argument that not everyone, but certainly much more people than right now, much more people should not be using social media. That's because we can first, to summarize, discard with the main concerns that it's a faenatumdnl technology you have to use. Nonsense: it's a slot machine in your phone. We can discard with this notion that you won't get a job without it. Nonsense: anything a six-year-old with a smartphone can do is not going to be what the market rewards. And then I emphasized the point that there's real hmars with it. So it's not just harmless. You really would have to have a significant benefit before you would say this trade-off is worth it. Finally I noted, that life without social media: there's real psiievtos associated with it. So I'm hoping that when many of you actually go through this same ccllauus, you'll at least consider the perspective I'm making right now, which is: many more people would be much better off if they didn't use this technology. Some of you might disagree, some of you might have scathing but accurate critiques of me and my points, and of course, I welcome all nagitvee fedbacek. I just ask that you direct your comments towards Twitter. Thank you. (Applause)

Open Cloze

You probably don't _______ that right now, you're actually looking at something quite rare. Because I am a millennial computer scientist book author standing on a TEDx stage, and yet, I've never had a social media account. How this happened was actually somewhat random. Social media first came onto my radar when I was at college, my sophomore year of college, this is when Facebook arrived at our campus. And at the time, which was right after the first dotcom bust, I had had a dorm room ________, I'd had to shut it down in the bust, and then, suddenly, this other kid from Harvard, named Mark, had this product called Facebook and people being excited about it. So in sort of a fit of somewhat immature professional ________, I said, "I'm not going to use this thing. I won't help this kid's business; whatever's going to amount to." As I go along my life, I look up not long later, and I see everyone I know is hooked on this thing. And from the clarity you can get when you have some objectivity, some perspective on it, I realized this seems a little bit dangerous. So I never signed up. I've never had a social media account since. So I'm here for two reasons; I want to _______ two ________. The first message I want to deliver is that even though I've never had a social media account, I'm OK, you don't have to worry. It turns out I still have _______, I still know what's going on in the world; as a ________ _________ I still collaborate with people all around the world, I'm still regularly exposed serendipitously to interesting ideas, and I rarely describe myself as lacking entertainment options. So I've been OK, but I'd go even farther and say not only I am OK without social media but I think I'm actually better off. I think I'm happier, I think I find more sustainability in my life, and I think I've been more successful professionally because I don't use social media. So my second goal here on stage is try to ________ more of you to believe the same thing. Let's see if I could actually convince more of you that you too would be better off if you quit ______ media. So, if the theme of this TEDx event is "Future Tense," I guess, in other words, this would be my ______ of the future, would be one in which fewer people actually use social media. That's a big claim, I think I need to back it up. So I thought, what I would do is take the three most common objections I hear when I suggest to people that they quit social media, and then for each of these objections, I'll try to defuse the hype and see if I can actually push in some more reality. This is the first most common objection I hear. That's not a hermit, that's actually a hipster web _________ down from 8th Street; I'm not sure. Hipster or ______? Sometimes it's hard to tell. This first objection goes as follows, "Cal, social media is one of the fundamental technologies of the 21st century. To reject social media would be an act of extreme [bloodism]. It would be like riding to work on a horse or using a rotary phone. I can't take such a big stance in my life." My reaction to that _________ is I think that is nonsense. Social media is not a fundamental technology. It leverages some fundamental technologies, but it's better understood as this. Which is to say, it's a source of entertainment, it's an entertainment product. The way that technologist _____ Lanier puts it is that these companies _____ you _____ treats in exchange for minutes of your attention and bites of your personal data, which can then be packaged up and sold. So to say that you don't use social media should not be a large social stance, it's just rejecting one form of _____________ for others. There should be no more controversial than saying, "I don't like newspapers, I like to get my news from _________," or "I prefer to watch cable ______, as opposed to network television series." It's not a _____ political or social stance to say you don't use this product. My use of the slot machine image up here also is not accidental because if you look a little bit ______ at these technologies, it's not just that they're a source of entertainment but they're a somewhat unsavory source of entertainment. We now know that many of the major social media companies hire individuals ______ attention _________, who borrow principles from Las Vegas casino gambling, among other places, to try to make these ________ as addictive as possible. That is the desired use case of these products: is that you use it in an addictive _______ because that maximizes the ______ that can be extracted from your attention and data. So it's not a fundamental technology, it's just a source of entertainment, one among many, and it's somewhat unsavory if you look a little bit closer. Here's the second common objection I hear when I suggest that people quit social media. The objection goes as follows, "Cal, I can't quit social media because it is vital to my success in the 21st century economy. If I do not have a well-cultivated social media _____, people won't know who I am, ______ won't be able to find me, opportunities won't come my way, and I will ___________ disappear from the economy." Again my reaction is once again: this objection also is nonsense. I recently published this book that _____ on multiple different strands of ________ to make the point that, in a ___________ 21st century economy, what the market values is the ability to produce things that are rare and are valuable. If you produce something that's rare and ________, the ______ will value that. What the market dismisses, for the most part, are activities that are easy to replicate and _______ a small ______ of value. Well, social media use is the epitome of an easy to replicate activity that doesn't produce a lot of value; it's something that any six-year-old with a smartphone can do. By definition, the market is not going to give a lot of value to those behaviors. It's instead going to ______ the deep, concentrated work required to build real ______ and to apply those skills to produce things - like a craftsman - that are rare and that are valuable. To put it another way: if you can _____ an elegant algorithm, if you can write a legal brief that can change a case, if you can write a thousand words of prose that's going to fixate a reader right to the end; if you can look at a sea of ambiguous data and apply statistics, and pull out insights that could transform a business strategy, if you can do these type of activities which require deep work, that produce outcomes that are rare and valuable, people will find you. You will be able to write your own ticket, and build the foundation of a meaningful and __________ ____________ life, regardless of how many _________ _________ you have. This is the third comment objection I hear when I suggest to people that they quit social media; in some sense, I think it might be one of the most _________. This objection goes as follows, "Cal, maybe I agree, maybe you're right; it's not a fundamental __________. Maybe using social media is not at the core of my professional success. But, you know what? It's harmless, I have some fun on it - weird: Twitter's _____ - I don't even use it that much, I'm a first _______, it's kind of interesting to try it out, and maybe I might miss out something if I don't use it. What's the harm?" Again, I look back and I say: this objection also is nonsense. In this case, what it misses is what I think is a very important reality that we need to talk about more frankly, which is that social media brings with it ________, well-documented, and significant harms. We actually have to confront these harms head-on when trying to make decisions about whether or not we embrace this technology and let it into our lives. One of these harms that we know this technology ______ has to do with your professional success. I just ______ before that the ability to _____ intensely, to produce things that are rare and valuable, to hone skills the market place value on, that this is what will ______ in our _______. But right before that, I argued that social media tools are ________ to be addictive. The ______ designed desired-use case of these tools is that you fragment your attention as much as possible throughout your waking hours; that's how these tools are designed to use. We have a growing amount of research which tells us that if you spend large portions of your day in a state of fragmented attention - _____ portions of your day, breaking up your attention, to take a quick glance, to just _____, - "Let me quickly look at Instagram" - that this can permanently reduce your capacity for concentration. In other words, you could permanently ______ your capacity to do exactly the type of deep effort that we're finding to be more and more necessary in an increasingly competitive economy. So social media use is not harmless, it can actually have a ___________ negative impact on your ability to ______ in the economy. I'm especially worried about this when we look at the younger generation, which is the most _________ in this technology. If you lose your ability to sustain concentration, you're going to become less and less relevant to this economy. There's also psychological harms that are well documented that social media brings, that we do need to address. We know from the research literature that the more you use social media, the more likely you are to feel lonely or isolated. We know that the constant exposure to your friends carefully curated, positive portrayals of their life can leave you to feel inadequate, and can increase rates of depression. And something I think we're going to be hearing more about in the near future is that there's a fundamental mismatch between the way our brains are wired and this behavior of exposing yourself to stimuli with intermittent rewards throughout all of your waking _____. It's one thing to spend a couple of hours at a slot machine in Las Vegas, but if you bring one with you, and you pull that ______ all day long, from when you wake up to when you go to bed: we're not _____ from it. It short-circuits the brain, and we're starting to find it has actual _________ consequences, one of them being this sort of pervasive __________ hum of anxiety. The canary in the coal mine for this issue is actually college ________. If you talk to mental health experts on college campuses, they'll tell you that along with the rise of ubiquitous smartphone use and social media use among the ________ on the campus, came an explosion of anxiety-related disorders on those campuses. That's the canary in the coal mine. This type of ________ is a mismatch for our brain wiring and can make you feel miserable. So there's real cost to social _____ use; which _____ when you're trying to decide, "Should I use this or not?", saying it's ________ is not enough. You actually have to identify a _____________ positive, clear benefit that can outweigh these potential, __________ non-trivial harms. People often ask, "OK, but what is life like without social media?" That can actually be a little bit scary to think about. According to people who went through this process, there can be a few difficult weeks. It actually is like a true detox process. The first two _____ can be uncomfortable: you feel a little bit anxious, you feel like you're missing a limb. But after that, things settle down, and actually, life after social media can be quite positive. There's two things I can report back from the world of no social media use. First, it can be quite productive. I'm a professor at a research ___________, I've written five books, I rarely work past 5 pm on a weekday. Part of the way I'm trying to able to pull that off is because it _____ out, if you treat your attention with _______, - so you don't fragment it; you allow it to stay whole, you preserve your concentration - when it comes time to work you can do one thing after another, and do it with intensity, and intensity can be traded for time. It's surprising how much you can get done in a eight-hour day if you're able to give each thing intense _____________ after another. Something else I can report back from life without social media is that outside of work, things can be quite ________. I often joke I'd be very comfortable being a 1930s farmer, because if you look at my leisure time, I read the newspaper while the sun comes up; I listen to baseball on the radio; I honest-to-god sit in a leather chair and read hardcover books at night after my kids go to bed. It sounds old-fashioned, but they were onto something back then. It's actually a restorative, peaceful way to actually spend your time out of work. You don't have the ________ hum of _______, and the background hum of _______ that comes along with that. So life without social media is really not so bad. If you pull together these threads, you see my full argument that not everyone, but certainly much more people than right now, much more people should not be using social media. That's because we can first, to summarize, discard with the main concerns that it's a ___________ technology you have to use. Nonsense: it's a slot machine in your phone. We can discard with this notion that you won't get a job without it. Nonsense: anything a six-year-old with a smartphone can do is not going to be what the market rewards. And then I emphasized the point that there's real _____ with it. So it's not just harmless. You really would have to have a significant benefit before you would say this trade-off is worth it. Finally I noted, that life without social media: there's real _________ associated with it. So I'm hoping that when many of you actually go through this same ________, you'll at least consider the perspective I'm making right now, which is: many more people would be much better off if they didn't use this technology. Some of you might disagree, some of you might have scathing but accurate critiques of me and my points, and of course, I welcome all ________ ________. I just ask that you direct your comments towards Twitter. Thank you. (Applause)

Solution

designed
deliver
closer
skills
check
reward
campuses
called
valuable
entertainment
argued
evidence
students
profit
magazines
produce
effectively
messages
successful
computer
shiny
anxiety
amount
social
scientist
focus
brand
handle
turns
economy
write
friends
significantly
realize
harms
market
calculus
matter
background
respect
products
media
multiple
thrive
competitive
engineers
negative
feedback
actual
means
people
cognitive
convince
concentration
vision
adopter
professional
important
constant
wired
completely
major
weeks
reduce
behavior
hermit
instagram
significant
institution
followers
business
funny
fashion
brings
saturated
developer
series
jealousy
peaceful
draws
technology
offer
large
positives
stimuli
hours
jaron
harmless
objection
fundamental

Original Text

You probably don't realize that right now, you're actually looking at something quite rare. Because I am a millennial computer scientist book author standing on a TEDx stage, and yet, I've never had a social media account. How this happened was actually somewhat random. Social media first came onto my radar when I was at college, my sophomore year of college, this is when Facebook arrived at our campus. And at the time, which was right after the first dotcom bust, I had had a dorm room business, I'd had to shut it down in the bust, and then, suddenly, this other kid from Harvard, named Mark, had this product called Facebook and people being excited about it. So in sort of a fit of somewhat immature professional jealousy, I said, "I'm not going to use this thing. I won't help this kid's business; whatever's going to amount to." As I go along my life, I look up not long later, and I see everyone I know is hooked on this thing. And from the clarity you can get when you have some objectivity, some perspective on it, I realized this seems a little bit dangerous. So I never signed up. I've never had a social media account since. So I'm here for two reasons; I want to deliver two messages. The first message I want to deliver is that even though I've never had a social media account, I'm OK, you don't have to worry. It turns out I still have friends, I still know what's going on in the world; as a computer scientist I still collaborate with people all around the world, I'm still regularly exposed serendipitously to interesting ideas, and I rarely describe myself as lacking entertainment options. So I've been OK, but I'd go even farther and say not only I am OK without social media but I think I'm actually better off. I think I'm happier, I think I find more sustainability in my life, and I think I've been more successful professionally because I don't use social media. So my second goal here on stage is try to convince more of you to believe the same thing. Let's see if I could actually convince more of you that you too would be better off if you quit social media. So, if the theme of this TEDx event is "Future Tense," I guess, in other words, this would be my vision of the future, would be one in which fewer people actually use social media. That's a big claim, I think I need to back it up. So I thought, what I would do is take the three most common objections I hear when I suggest to people that they quit social media, and then for each of these objections, I'll try to defuse the hype and see if I can actually push in some more reality. This is the first most common objection I hear. That's not a hermit, that's actually a hipster web developer down from 8th Street; I'm not sure. Hipster or hermit? Sometimes it's hard to tell. This first objection goes as follows, "Cal, social media is one of the fundamental technologies of the 21st century. To reject social media would be an act of extreme [bloodism]. It would be like riding to work on a horse or using a rotary phone. I can't take such a big stance in my life." My reaction to that objection is I think that is nonsense. Social media is not a fundamental technology. It leverages some fundamental technologies, but it's better understood as this. Which is to say, it's a source of entertainment, it's an entertainment product. The way that technologist Jaron Lanier puts it is that these companies offer you shiny treats in exchange for minutes of your attention and bites of your personal data, which can then be packaged up and sold. So to say that you don't use social media should not be a large social stance, it's just rejecting one form of entertainment for others. There should be no more controversial than saying, "I don't like newspapers, I like to get my news from magazines," or "I prefer to watch cable series, as opposed to network television series." It's not a major political or social stance to say you don't use this product. My use of the slot machine image up here also is not accidental because if you look a little bit closer at these technologies, it's not just that they're a source of entertainment but they're a somewhat unsavory source of entertainment. We now know that many of the major social media companies hire individuals called attention engineers, who borrow principles from Las Vegas casino gambling, among other places, to try to make these products as addictive as possible. That is the desired use case of these products: is that you use it in an addictive fashion because that maximizes the profit that can be extracted from your attention and data. So it's not a fundamental technology, it's just a source of entertainment, one among many, and it's somewhat unsavory if you look a little bit closer. Here's the second common objection I hear when I suggest that people quit social media. The objection goes as follows, "Cal, I can't quit social media because it is vital to my success in the 21st century economy. If I do not have a well-cultivated social media brand, people won't know who I am, people won't be able to find me, opportunities won't come my way, and I will effectively disappear from the economy." Again my reaction is once again: this objection also is nonsense. I recently published this book that draws on multiple different strands of evidence to make the point that, in a competitive 21st century economy, what the market values is the ability to produce things that are rare and are valuable. If you produce something that's rare and valuable, the market will value that. What the market dismisses, for the most part, are activities that are easy to replicate and produce a small amount of value. Well, social media use is the epitome of an easy to replicate activity that doesn't produce a lot of value; it's something that any six-year-old with a smartphone can do. By definition, the market is not going to give a lot of value to those behaviors. It's instead going to reward the deep, concentrated work required to build real skills and to apply those skills to produce things - like a craftsman - that are rare and that are valuable. To put it another way: if you can write an elegant algorithm, if you can write a legal brief that can change a case, if you can write a thousand words of prose that's going to fixate a reader right to the end; if you can look at a sea of ambiguous data and apply statistics, and pull out insights that could transform a business strategy, if you can do these type of activities which require deep work, that produce outcomes that are rare and valuable, people will find you. You will be able to write your own ticket, and build the foundation of a meaningful and successful professional life, regardless of how many Instagram followers you have. This is the third comment objection I hear when I suggest to people that they quit social media; in some sense, I think it might be one of the most important. This objection goes as follows, "Cal, maybe I agree, maybe you're right; it's not a fundamental technology. Maybe using social media is not at the core of my professional success. But, you know what? It's harmless, I have some fun on it - weird: Twitter's funny - I don't even use it that much, I'm a first adopter, it's kind of interesting to try it out, and maybe I might miss out something if I don't use it. What's the harm?" Again, I look back and I say: this objection also is nonsense. In this case, what it misses is what I think is a very important reality that we need to talk about more frankly, which is that social media brings with it multiple, well-documented, and significant harms. We actually have to confront these harms head-on when trying to make decisions about whether or not we embrace this technology and let it into our lives. One of these harms that we know this technology brings has to do with your professional success. I just argued before that the ability to focus intensely, to produce things that are rare and valuable, to hone skills the market place value on, that this is what will matter in our economy. But right before that, I argued that social media tools are designed to be addictive. The actual designed desired-use case of these tools is that you fragment your attention as much as possible throughout your waking hours; that's how these tools are designed to use. We have a growing amount of research which tells us that if you spend large portions of your day in a state of fragmented attention - large portions of your day, breaking up your attention, to take a quick glance, to just check, - "Let me quickly look at Instagram" - that this can permanently reduce your capacity for concentration. In other words, you could permanently reduce your capacity to do exactly the type of deep effort that we're finding to be more and more necessary in an increasingly competitive economy. So social media use is not harmless, it can actually have a significant negative impact on your ability to thrive in the economy. I'm especially worried about this when we look at the younger generation, which is the most saturated in this technology. If you lose your ability to sustain concentration, you're going to become less and less relevant to this economy. There's also psychological harms that are well documented that social media brings, that we do need to address. We know from the research literature that the more you use social media, the more likely you are to feel lonely or isolated. We know that the constant exposure to your friends carefully curated, positive portrayals of their life can leave you to feel inadequate, and can increase rates of depression. And something I think we're going to be hearing more about in the near future is that there's a fundamental mismatch between the way our brains are wired and this behavior of exposing yourself to stimuli with intermittent rewards throughout all of your waking hours. It's one thing to spend a couple of hours at a slot machine in Las Vegas, but if you bring one with you, and you pull that handle all day long, from when you wake up to when you go to bed: we're not wired from it. It short-circuits the brain, and we're starting to find it has actual cognitive consequences, one of them being this sort of pervasive background hum of anxiety. The canary in the coal mine for this issue is actually college campuses. If you talk to mental health experts on college campuses, they'll tell you that along with the rise of ubiquitous smartphone use and social media use among the students on the campus, came an explosion of anxiety-related disorders on those campuses. That's the canary in the coal mine. This type of behavior is a mismatch for our brain wiring and can make you feel miserable. So there's real cost to social media use; which means when you're trying to decide, "Should I use this or not?", saying it's harmless is not enough. You actually have to identify a significantly positive, clear benefit that can outweigh these potential, completely non-trivial harms. People often ask, "OK, but what is life like without social media?" That can actually be a little bit scary to think about. According to people who went through this process, there can be a few difficult weeks. It actually is like a true detox process. The first two weeks can be uncomfortable: you feel a little bit anxious, you feel like you're missing a limb. But after that, things settle down, and actually, life after social media can be quite positive. There's two things I can report back from the world of no social media use. First, it can be quite productive. I'm a professor at a research institution, I've written five books, I rarely work past 5 pm on a weekday. Part of the way I'm trying to able to pull that off is because it turns out, if you treat your attention with respect, - so you don't fragment it; you allow it to stay whole, you preserve your concentration - when it comes time to work you can do one thing after another, and do it with intensity, and intensity can be traded for time. It's surprising how much you can get done in a eight-hour day if you're able to give each thing intense concentration after another. Something else I can report back from life without social media is that outside of work, things can be quite peaceful. I often joke I'd be very comfortable being a 1930s farmer, because if you look at my leisure time, I read the newspaper while the sun comes up; I listen to baseball on the radio; I honest-to-god sit in a leather chair and read hardcover books at night after my kids go to bed. It sounds old-fashioned, but they were onto something back then. It's actually a restorative, peaceful way to actually spend your time out of work. You don't have the constant hum of stimuli, and the background hum of anxiety that comes along with that. So life without social media is really not so bad. If you pull together these threads, you see my full argument that not everyone, but certainly much more people than right now, much more people should not be using social media. That's because we can first, to summarize, discard with the main concerns that it's a fundamental technology you have to use. Nonsense: it's a slot machine in your phone. We can discard with this notion that you won't get a job without it. Nonsense: anything a six-year-old with a smartphone can do is not going to be what the market rewards. And then I emphasized the point that there's real harms with it. So it's not just harmless. You really would have to have a significant benefit before you would say this trade-off is worth it. Finally I noted, that life without social media: there's real positives associated with it. So I'm hoping that when many of you actually go through this same calculus, you'll at least consider the perspective I'm making right now, which is: many more people would be much better off if they didn't use this technology. Some of you might disagree, some of you might have scathing but accurate critiques of me and my points, and of course, I welcome all negative feedback. I just ask that you direct your comments towards Twitter. Thank you. (Applause)

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

ngrams of length 2

collocation	frequency
social media	29
quit social	5
fundamental technology	3
slot machine	3
computer scientist	2
media account	2
common objection	2
bit closer	2
professional success	2
large portions	2
permanently reduce	2
background hum	2

ngrams of length 3

collocation	frequency
quit social media	3
social media account	2

Important Words

ability
accidental
account
accurate
act
activities
activity
actual
addictive
address
adopter
agree
algorithm
ambiguous
amount
anxiety
anxious
applause
apply
argued
argument
arrived
attention
author
background
bad
baseball
bed
behavior
behaviors
benefit
big
bit
bites
bloodism
book
books
borrow
brain
brains
brand
breaking
bring
brings
build
business
bust
cable
calculus
called
campus
campuses
canary
capacity
carefully
case
casino
century
chair
change
check
claim
clarity
clear
closer
coal
cognitive
collaborate
college
comfortable
comment
comments
common
companies
competitive
completely
computer
concentrated
concentration
concerns
confront
consequences
constant
controversial
convince
core
cost
couple
craftsman
critiques
curated
dangerous
data
day
decide
decisions
deep
definition
defuse
deliver
depression
describe
designed
desired
detox
developer
difficult
direct
disagree
disappear
discard
dismisses
disorders
documented
dorm
dotcom
draws
easy
economy
effectively
effort
elegant
embrace
emphasized
engineers
entertainment
epitome
event
evidence
exchange
excited
experts
explosion
exposed
exposing
exposure
extracted
extreme
facebook
farmer
fashion
feedback
feel
finally
find
finding
fit
fixate
focus
followers
form
foundation
fragment
fragmented
frankly
friends
full
fun
fundamental
funny
future
gambling
generation
give
glance
goal
growing
guess
handle
happened
happier
hard
hardcover
harm
harmless
harms
harvard
health
hear
hearing
hermit
hipster
hire
hone
hooked
hoping
horse
hours
hum
hype
ideas
identify
image
immature
impact
important
inadequate
increase
increasingly
individuals
insights
instagram
institution
intense
intensely
intensity
interesting
intermittent
isolated
issue
jaron
jealousy
job
joke
kid
kids
kind
lacking
lanier
large
las
leather
leave
legal
leisure
leverages
life
limb
listen
literature
lives
lonely
long
lose
lot
machine
magazines
main
major
making
mark
market
matter
maximizes
meaningful
means
media
mental
message
messages
millennial
minutes
miserable
mismatch
misses
missing
multiple
named
negative
network
news
newspaper
newspapers
night
nonsense
noted
notion
objection
objections
objectivity
offer
opportunities
opposed
options
outcomes
outweigh
packaged
part
peaceful
people
permanently
personal
perspective
pervasive
phone
place
places
pm
point
points
political
portions
portrayals
positive
positives
potential
prefer
preserve
principles
process
produce
product
productive
products
professional
professionally
professor
profit
prose
psychological
published
pull
push
put
puts
quick
quickly
quit
radar
random
rare
rarely
rates
reaction
read
reader
real
reality
realize
realized
reduce
regularly
reject
rejecting
relevant
replicate
report
require
required
research
respect
restorative
reward
rewards
riding
rise
room
rotary
saturated
scary
scathing
scientist
sea
sense
serendipitously
series
settle
shiny
shut
signed
significant
significantly
sit
skills
slot
small
smartphone
social
sold
sophomore
sort
sounds
source
spend
stage
stance
standing
starting
state
statistics
stay
stimuli
strands
strategy
students
success
successful
suddenly
suggest
summarize
sun
surprising
sustain
sustainability
talk
technologies
technologist
technology
tedx
television
tells
tense
theme
thought
thousand
threads
thrive
ticket
time
tools
traded
transform
treat
treats
true
turns
twitter
type
ubiquitous
understood
unsavory
valuable
values
vegas
vision
vital
wake
waking
watch
web
weekday
weeks
wired
wiring
words
work
world
worried
worry
worth
write
written
year
younger