Faking Cultural Literacy

Karl Greenfeld writes for the NY Times:

THERE was a time when we knew where we were getting our ideas. In my eighth grade English class, we were assigned “A Tale of Two Cities,” and lest we enjoy the novel, we were instructed to read Charles Dickens’s classic with an eye toward tracking the symbolism in the text. One afternoon while I was in the library, struggling to find symbols, I ran into a few of my classmates, who removed from their pockets folded yellow and black pamphlets that read “Cliffs Notes” and beneath that the title of Dickens’s novel in block letters. That “study guide” was a revelation.

Here were the plot, the characters, even the symbols, all laid out in paragraphs and bullet points. I read the Cliffs Notes in one night, and wrote my B paper without finishing the novel. The lesson was not to immerse and get lost in the actual cultural document itself but to mine it for any valuable ore and minerals — data, factoids, what you need to know — and then trade them on the open market.

With the advent of each new technology — movable type, radio, television, the Internet — there have been laments that the end is nigh for illuminated manuscripts, for books, magazines and newspapers. What is different now is the ubiquity of the technology that is replacing every old medium.

The information is everywhere, a constant feed in our hands, in our pockets, on our desktops, our cars, even in the cloud. The data stream can’t be shut off. It pours into our lives a rising tide of words, facts, jokes, GIFs, gossip and commentary that threatens to drown us. Perhaps it is this fear of submersion that is behind this insistence that we’ve seen, we’ve read, we know. It’s a none-too-convincing assertion that we are still afloat. So here we are, desperately paddling, making observations about pop culture memes, because to admit that we’ve fallen behind, that we don’t know what anyone is talking about, that we have nothing to say about each passing blip on the screen, is to be dead.

Read the rest.

You Can't Win The Internet

Aaron Armstrong:

Although the Internet encourages a certain kind of zeal for one’s own views, we should always strive for something better. The Internet is not something you can win, therefore we shouldn’t try.

Instead, we should try to do these things:

1. Take a deep breath. Don’t get your fauxtrage on, friends. Or at least, don’t post/tweet/update/pin/plus/twerp when you’ve got it on. Take a deep breath. Go for a walk. Have a cookie. Get away from your device for a while to see if your rage is legit or you’re just a rampaging rageoholic. Who knows? You might just be gassy.

2. Try to actually understand the point. This might be a tall order, but I’m confident it can be done. A great way to do this is to ask good questions, which also means avoid leading or entrapment style ones whenever possible.

3. Keep our mouths shut. Sometimes the best thing we can do when we disagree with something on the Internet is to just say nothing. This is especially important when we’re dealing with other people who really, really want to goad you into a fight with click-baity blog posts and tweets. Remember, those people are trying to win the Intenets, too. And if you take the click-bait, they win.

Read the rest.  

The Twitter Disconnect: Why Christians are More Loving in Real Life

Ryan Hamm:

When we argue in real life, it’s often a very private affair, with the possibility of reconciliation with an apology, confession, and mutual submission to God. When we argue on Twitter, it’s out there for anyone to see—and embed on whatever site they want.

Perhaps it’s time for Christians to reconsider how we use social media. What are we saying to one another that we wouldn’t say offline? Are we speaking to one another as humans, or as presumed enemies of whatever cause we most strongly believe in—even causes and beliefs that are of vital importance to the Gospel? How do we cultivate a persona of holiness in our daily lives and how can we carry that cultivation into our online lives? Why are our words online disconnected from the stuff of holiness?

Whatever Twitter brouhaha happens among the faithful next week (and don’t worry, there will be one), I hope we can inch a bit closer to being more holistic Christians online, balancing vulnerability with the knowledge that our immediate reactions might not always be helpful. I hope we can learn how to balance our deeply held convictions or beliefs with a basic kindness and love that should define our faith. I hope if someone says “they’re actually really nice” about me or you or any other Christian, anyone can look at our Twitter feeds and find that to be true.

Read the rest.

On The Foolishness of The Twitter War

Trevin Wax:

I know what a Twitter battle is because I’ve engaged in them a time or two. After the last one, I came to the realization that these online interactions are virtually useless in creating and sustaining real and meaningful conversations about highly-charged issues.

Twitter is a place for conversation, but once we go into battle mode, I think the legitimate conversation is already over. Twitter battles are like putting on a spectacle for the perverse pleasure (or dismay) of the Twitter audience. Has anyone watching one of these debacles ever said, “You know what? You convinced me! I’m wrong and you’re right.” No one. Ever.

I’ve declined to engage in most Twitter debates, but after jumping into the ring a time or two, I’ve decided not to do so anymore. I love conversing on Twitter, but once I see the conversation devolving into the battle, from this point on, I’m going to step out. Here’s why...

Read the rest.

"At some point, putting the phone down becomes a matter of spiritual warfare."

Great post here on parenting in our age of ever increasing technology.

Twitter Celebrities, Voyeurism, Purging, and 8 Criteria to Follow

Interesting thoughts here about one way to approach the use of Twitter.  Some of you may be helped by it.  I certainly was.

A New Approach To Our iPhone Addiction

Faux Outrage on the Internet is Numbing Our Souls

Tim Challies:

There are times for outrage. There are times to turn away from leaders who have proven themselves unworthy or unfaithful. There are times to expose the charlatan or the unfaithful and to make a fuss and to raise an outcry for the sake of distancing ourselves and protecting others. But it’s not every time. It’s not all the time.

There is a cost to our outrage porn. Ryan Holliday says, “What is real is the toll that fake outrage takes. Psychologists call it the ‘narcotizing dysfunction,’ essentially that thinking and chattering about something eventually gets confused and equated with doing something about it. Of course it doesn’t—but after enough blog posts we delude ourselves into believing we’ve made a difference.” This is similar to what Neil Postman warned us about all those years ago: That the modern news cycle gives us information we can do nothing about, so that while we feel all kinds of emotion, we actually do nothing at all. Airing your grievances is not the same as taking action any more than looking at pornography is making love to your wife.

But there may be a greater cost: when we are outraged about every little matter, we lose our ability to be outraged about the most important matters. When we respond with outrage to every little offense, eventually we become hardened to the things that actually matter. If everything is outrageous, nothing is outrageous.

The fact is, so much Internet-based outrage is manufactured outrage, carefully structured to achieve the end of luring eyeballs to articles. This is the worst kind of outrage because it is designed to attract readers, not to bring about change. It serves us, not the other person and not the church or the Lord of the church. And in that way, the “porn” label fits it very well.

Read the rest.

Why We Argue Like Jerks

Bradford Davis:

The other day, I found myself flipping through channels in the ninth circle of Hell, otherwise known as cable news. Two guests were debating about the latest public policy or gossip column. Pundit A let me know that Pundit B hates the truth. Pundit B told me about the secret ‘WAR on _____’ (You haven’t heard of that war yet? Because you’re probably fighting it.) The host “moderates” the discussion by provoking one or both guests, stating something that’s phrased as a question, but I’m not too sure is an actually query (e.g. ‘How could a decent human being possibly support what you believe?’). . . . What’s most painful for me is when I find myself ironically cussing at the tube. Or, writing a 2,000 word essay telling someone on the internet that they are wrong. As much as I hate it, I am very much the problem that I want to solve.

Read the rest.  

(HT:  JD)

Why Are We Still on Facebook?

I have been feeling this lately.

The New Yorker:

At the University of Texas at Austin, Gosling and one of his graduate students, Gabriella Harari, have been examining why people decide to leave Facebook. They have found three broad themes: people see Facebook as pointless and unnecessary, they see it as a problematic distraction, and they are worried about privacy. As you experience a constant stream of updates from more people, the possibilities for distraction or frustration at a pointless update (did I really need to know that her baby is now teething?) rise apace. And as you share more information with more people, it all becomes a window into who you are—even the parts you might prefer to keep private. The more publicly we form and affirm social bonds—and the more people we form and affirm them with—the more likely we are to see our mental bandwidth filled and our privacy eroded.

Read the rest.

22 Thoughts on Richard Sherman's Interview

Tommy Tomlinson:

1. So the Seahawks beat the 49ers to go to the Super Bowl, and Seattle cornerback Richard Sherman made the game-saving play, and Erin Andrews interviewed him on the field immediately after the game, and he hollered like a crazy person:

2. Within seconds people on social media were calling him a fool, a thug, a classless jerk and many worse things. 

3. Sherman is black, and so of course there was an undercurrent of race to some — OK, a lot — of the discussion. 

4. Sherman graduated second in his class in high school and also graduated from Stanford. So not only is he not a fool, odds are he’s smarter than you and me. 

5. His degree from Stanford was in communications … which might explain why, while he seemed to be hollering like a crazy person, he didn’t curse and looked into the camera the whole time. 

6. In other words, he might have just been auditioning for the WWE. 

7. Maybe 15 minutes later, when Sherman sat down with the Fox NFL guys, he was calm and funny. 

8. If you stick a microphone in a football player’s face seconds after he made a huge play to send his team to the Super Bowl, you shouldn’t be surprised if he’s a little amped up. 

9. Ninety-nine percent of on-field interviews are boring and useless. The TV networks do them anyway for the 1 percent of the time they get a moment like Richard Sherman. 

10. As a reporter and writer, that raw emotion — whatever form it takes — is exactly what I hope for. That’s why media people fight for access to locker rooms. After players and coaches cool off, most of them turn into Crash Davis, reading from the book of cliches. 

11. But we — the media, and fans in general — don’t know what we want. We rip athletes for giving us boring quotes. But if they say what they actually feel, we rip them for spouting off or showing a lack of class. 

12. It’s like we want them to be thinking, Well, that was a fine contest, and jolly good that we won. Which NO athlete is EVER thinking. 

13. As a side note: Richard Sherman also called out Skip Bayless on Bayless’ own show, which trumps pretty much anything bad that Richard Sherman has done in his life. 

14. So: Did you watch the game? 

15. Did you see the two most physical teams in football beat each other half to death? Did you see all the brutal hits? Did you see all the players who couldn’t get up after the play? Did you see all those guys who had to be helped off the field? 

16. Did you see NaVorro Bowman, the stud linebacker for the 49ers, wreck his knee when a Seattle player fell on it? I’m not sure how you could’ve missed it — Fox must have shown the replay 20 times. 

17. (I understand that it was a big play — Bowman recovered a fumble at the goal line, although the refs called it the other way. It deserved another look. But still: Can’t you crop out Bowman’s crumpled knee, or put a black bar over it, or something? After one or two replays, isn’t it just injury porn?)

18. Anyway: That was the kind of game it was. Rough and angry and so violent that at times it was hard to watch. 

19. This, of course, is part of the attraction of football. And part of the reason so many players leave the sport crippled and concussed. 

20. Richard Sherman made the big play Sunday. His team is going to the Super Bowl. 

21. More important, he survived the carnage. 

22. It seems to me that the only proper response to surviving something like that is to holler like a crazy person.

"For 2014, Tweet Less, Read More"

Great article here in the NY Times.  His conclusion:

For more than two decades, there’s been a celebration of slow food. Over the last few years, we’ve proved receptive to slow TV. What we really need is slow debate. It would trade the sugary highs and lows of rapid-fire outrage for a more balanced diet. We’d be healthier. Probably happier, too.

Read the rest.

So True.

(HT: Los)

Social Tools, Better Leadership

Good thoughts on social media for leaders by Adam Jeske.  He writes:

You know you should be using social media more effectively than you are. Your peers have thousands (or tens of thousands) of "fans" and "followers." You have a couple social media accounts on different platforms, but you're not sure what to do with them to serve your people.

Well, do what you've always done in ministry. Receive, connect, and give.

Read the rest.

Get Off The Phone Now!

We Are Obsessed With Personal Promotion

6 Questions to Ask Yourself Before Posting on Social Media

R.C. Sproul Jr.  

1. Ask yourself- if my mother, pastor, spouse, children were to read this, would they be ashamed of me?

2. Ask yourself- where is this coming from?

3. Ask yourself- have I practiced a judgment of charity toward the person I am writing about/responding to?

4. Ask yourself- am I seeking to serve Jesus with this post, or am I seeking my own?

5. Ask yourself- am I casting pearls before swine?

6. Ask yourself- am I being a troll?

Read the rest for his explanations.  

Social Media in Real Life

True.

5 Reasons It’s More Important for Pastors to Use Social Media Than Churches

Guest post by John Poitevent

By Rich Birch via The Vision Room

When I first encountered Facebook, I was at a speaking event on a University campus that had access to the up-start social network trying to take on MySpace. The student leaders we met with for lunch were talking about this amazing new tool for connecting with each other. It seemed like a fun “on campus trend” but never did I imagine the impact it would have on the ministry world.  How could a tool that made it easier for a group of students to meet at a pub end up impacting our church?

My conviction is that pastors as individuals need to be on social media.  It’s more important that church leaders leverage these tools for ministry than churches use them as organizations. As a church leader are you using these tools as an extension of your ministry or are you still stuck on the outside of this trend wondering if it really can have any impact on your ministry? You need to jump in and get connected! Here a few reasons why it’s important for you to use these tool personally …

• Distant from Your People // If you are silent on social media you will increasingly be seen as aloof and disconnected as you refuse to be transparent to your community. Imagine a preacher who never told any stories about themselves? People will see you in the same light if you don’t use these tools.
• Personal Medium // 87 of the top 100 accounts on Twitter are for people not brands or organizations. These tools are designed to make personal connection with people. As a church you can leverage them … but they are meant for people to connect with individuals.
• Content Curation // Your people are out in the internet finding content of spiritual significance. Using social media to point to other sources of uplifting content is a part of your role. Equipping your people to follow Jesus can’t be outsourced to someone else … it’s a critical part of being a pastor. When you are silent on social media you are missing an vital opportunity to build up your community.
• Insight Into People // Church leaders live in a bubble … often everyone we know is a part of the church. If we don’t work intentionally at it we will become isolated from the world we are attempting to reach. Engaging in social media gives you insight into the lives of people around you. Listen and watch what people are talking about it … it will give you insights to be a better leader.
• Don’t Be Left Behind // Social media is moving beyond a fun tool for people to connect with friends to a critical communications channel. Not personally using social media is like refusing to have an email address or deciding that cel phones are too modern of a technology … you will become increasingly left behind by culture. You will lose influence.

It’s not about being cool … it’s about connecting.
Read more from Rich here.

How effective is your church website? (infographic)