-
NYT: Growing up, "WiReD" for distraction
(sticky caps mine)
This is a rather old one, sent along a while ago by Ellie, who writes:
I’m pretty sick of NYT constantly kvetching about Youth Today, is all I can say.
This story is pretty comprehensive, right? One thing struck me while watching the video and reading this:
….[Vishal’s] ability to be distracted by computers is rivaled by his proficiency with them. At the beginning of his junior year, he discovered a passion for filmmaking and made a name for himself among friends and teachers with his storytelling in videos made with digital cameras and editing software.
Vishal, out of all of his friends, will probably be the only one with a decent media job.
-
NYRB: "Generation Why?" Zadie Smith has faith in us, and less in our software
This happened: Zadie Smith wrote about The Social Network.
“Perhaps Generation Facebook have built their virtual mansions in good faith, in order to house the People 2.0 they genuinely are, and if I feel uncomfortable within them it is because I am stuck at Person 1.0. Then again, the more time I spend with the tail end of Generation Facebook (in the shape of my students) the more convinced I become that some of the software currently shaping their generation is unworthy of them. They are more interesting than it is. They deserve better.
…
Generation Facebook’s obsession with this type of “celebrity lifestyle” is more than familiar. It’s pitiful, it pains us, and we recognize it. But would Zuckerberg recognize it, the real Zuckerberg? Are these really his motivations, his obsessions? No—and the movie knows it.
…
Watching this movie, even though you know Sorkin wants your disapproval, you can’t help feel a little swell of pride in this 2.0 generation. They’ve spent a decade being berated for not making the right sorts of paintings or novels or music or politics. Turns out the brightest 2.0 kids have been doing something else extraordinary. They’ve been making a world.
-
NYT: Now we're Generation "O," you know, like the blood type
‘“It’s not the fad anymore,” said Jessica Kirsner, 21, a junior from Houston and vice president of the College Democrats. “It’s not the fad to be politically knowledgeable and active.”
This was not what Generation O expected.’
Thanks to Nadine for the tip! She writes:
“I’m not familiar with this ‘Generation 0,’ but it certainly sounds flattering.”
-
NYT: Have college freshmen changed?
Featuring some of the country’s most outspoken “Gen Me” pundits, coincidentally (?) uniformly white and over 40! Take a look at some of those book titles.
(h/t Amanda)
-
Stupid Studies: Teen sex not always bad for school performance (AP)
“Compared with virgins, teens who have casual sex had lower GPAs, cared less about school and experienced more problems in school. For example, female teens who have flings had GPAs that were 0.16 points lower than abstinent teens. Male teens who have casual sex had GPAs that were 0.30 points lower than those who do not have sex. Teens who hook up also were at greater risk of being suspended or expelled and had lower odds of expecting to go to college.”
-
WaPo: Digital diversions leave teens, parents sleep-deprived
“Pushing teens to get enough rest is an ever-more difficult quest as another school year begins and triggers another round of family debates about cellphones and game consoles, iPods and laptops. What teen wants to drift off when another text is arriving, when X-Box friends are still online, when Facebook is 24/7?”
-
‘We Are Not Lazy’
That’s the title of Raphael’s contribution to the NYT’s “Room for Debate,” and I think he’s right.
Maybe not, though. I mean, just look at this picture the Times chose to accompany the debate:
Part of me wishes my college experience were more like theirs.
Go Raph! In agreement, completely.
-
"That is, baby boomers have discovered and labeled something as new—the better to obsess over it—that has actually been observed for a century or so in the developed world, not least among their own cohort."
Ann Hulbert, in a Slate discussion of the 20-somethings article. This is definitely worth a read — it brilliantly articulates many of the reasons why the ageist journalism features on this blog is so prominent now. (thanks to everyone who sent me the link!)
-
NYT Magazine: What is it about 20-Somethings?
(This article is probably the apex of everything I’ve posted thus far. A truly thought out, 10-page inquiry into why young people suck So Damn Much. I wish I had the leisure time to read the whole thing!)
“Why are so many people in their 20s taking so long to grow up?”
-
Wall Street Journal is still old and ratchety: Youth has outlived its usefulness
“On the Internet, you read the fierce posts of political and ideological writers and wonder, Why do so many young bloggers sound like hyenas laughing in the dark? Maybe it’s because there’s no old hand at the next desk to turn and say, ‘Son, being an enraged, profane, unmoderated, unmediated, hit-loving, trash-talking rage monkey is no way to go through life.’
…
Who might benefit from a real, if not consciously felt, longing for the old, tried and true? Not a Facebook jockey twittering from deepest cyberspace.”
(via Gawker)
