Digital ‘Diabetes’

It’s not so hard to imagine. You are asked to see a child who has been assaulted at the school gates. The provocation? Posting his new haircut on social media then having an argument with an online troll (attending the same school) who accuses him of being ‘gay’. The troll then waits for him the next morning and punches him in the face. Thankfully he has sustained only soft tissue injuries.^*

The line between our virtual and physical lives seems ever more porous. Smartphone technology, internet availability, and connection speed means we now have access 24 hours a day. Most jobs now involve a screen and being online. ‘What does this new reality do to our minds and brains?’ is a question yet to have enough evidence to answer. However, it is fast becoming clear that we are no happier or healthier for it.

Finally it seems there are noises from government wanting to ban smartphones for under 16s,¹ which would make them an equivalent political health risk to smoking. In a disturbing modern parallel, where once it was common for people to spark a cigarette when they had 5 minutes of not knowing what to do, now it seems that has been replaced by an almost reflex reach for our phones to see if there is anything new to be aware of. But in the same way the dangers of smoking were known about long before they were acted on, it is likely that big tech producers will not give up a huge section of their market without a fight. Corporate capitalism will promise the individual great rewards but loves to blame them for their choices and behaviour in equal measure. It is never the corporation’s fault, they only make the product. Petrol giant BP, for example, popularised the phrase ‘carbon footprint’ in 2004 to place responsibility squarely at the door of the individual consumer.

Social media is now an ever-present reality in our daily habits. It is where we can broadcast our daily lives and where we can receive the vast majority of our understanding of the world from. Undoubtedly it can be a force for good as it allows information sharing beyond the control of government message. Yet it also has a darker side: the Cambridge Analytica scandal highlighted this with its capacity for targeted election interference.² What we read and how we inform our world view is increasingly suggested and given to us by powerful algorithms that don’t necessarily have our best interests at heart.

Not only this, but by interacting with social media we are giving away an endless amount of personal data about ourselves that can be sold on to companies to individually target us. Not to mention the risks to personal security. It is estimated that given 15 pieces of de-identified data, almost 99.98% of people can be identified.³

Johann Hari, in his insightful book Stolen Focus, reveals the horrifying social media approach of ‘enrage to engage’. It is understood among those in the tech world that emotional content is what keeps our eyes on the screen the most. The longer our eyes are on the screen, the more likely we are to see the adverts chosen for us. The content is cynically designed by some of the smartest minds in the business to provoke a strong reaction in us as that is more likely to make us engage with it. Hari claims that YouTube’s algorithm is specifically designed to recommend a slightly more extreme and controversial video after the one you have just seen.⁴ Is it any wonder that our attention spans are reducing if social media dominates how spare time is spent?

Facebook (who also own Instagram) has recently been outed as being actively aware of the negative body-image that they cultivate.⁵ In 2016, Common Sense found that 78% of teenagers were checking their phones hourly,⁶ and LSE found that 51% of infants aged 6–11 months were using a touch-screen daily in a study of 700 participants.⁷ With this in mind, is it any wonder we find modern society increasingly polarised, fractured, and argumentative? Especially when the content that we feed ourselves with to understand the world is actively trying to unbalance and upset us. The increase in mental health issues, particularly in younger people, is massively on the rise. This is a group of people for whom there was no life before internet. Is this really a coincidence?

The etymology of the word ‘Diabetes’ comes from the Greek work ‘to syphon’. Its use in modern medicine alluding to the bodies inability to syphon off the sugar appropriately.

The digital world is here to stay but how much screen time is healthy? As toxicologists love to point out, it is the dose that makes the poison. As in so many areas, the body’s capacity to endure, recover, regenerate, and repair can only happen under so much stress and poor health choices. Like the pancreas, when faced with a daily onslaught of acidic glucose in the bloodstream, it will eventually burn out.

Digital Diabetes: a pathological state of mind brought on by the brain’s inability to syphon off excessive digital information and content.

It seems clear that the age of Digital Diabetes is now here, but what are we going to do about it?