sample essay article how internet affects life

MIT Technology Review

• Newsletters

The Impact of the Internet on Society: A Global Perspective

• Manuel Castells archive page

Provided by BBVA

The Internet is the decisive technology of the Information Age, and with the explosion of wireless communication in the early twenty-first century, we can say that humankind is now almost entirely connected, albeit with great levels of inequality in bandwidth, efficiency, and price.

People, companies, and institutions feel the depth of this technological change, but the speed and scope of the transformation has triggered all manner of utopian and dystopian perceptions that, when examined closely through methodologically rigorous empirical research, turn out not to be accurate. For instance, media often report that intense use of the Internet increases the risk of isolation, alienation, and withdrawal from society, but available evidence shows that the Internet neither isolates people nor reduces their sociability; it actually increases sociability, civic engagement, and the intensity of family and friendship relationships, in all cultures.

Our current “network society” is a product of the digital revolution and some major sociocultural changes. One of these is the rise of the “Me-centered society,” marked by an increased focus on individual growth and a decline in community understood in terms of space, work, family, and ascription in general. But individuation does not mean isolation, or the end of community. Instead, social relationships are being reconstructed on the basis of individual interests, values, and projects. Community is formed through individuals’ quests for like-minded people in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace, and the local space.

View other articles provided by BBVA OpenMind:

• the way of the dodo.

• A Revolution in Business • Banking, Information, and Technology: Toward Knowledge Banking • Cyber Attacks

Globally, time spent on social networking sites surpassed time spent on e-mail in November 2007, and the number of social networking users surpassed the number of e-mail users in July 2009. Today, social networking sites are the preferred platforms for all kinds of activities, both business and personal, and sociability has dramatically increased — but it is a different kind of sociability. Most Facebook users visit the site daily, and they connect on multiple dimensions, but only on the dimensions they choose. The virtual life is becoming more social than the physical life, but it is less a virtual reality than a real virtuality, facilitating real-life work and urban living.

Because people are increasingly at ease in the Web’s multidimensionality, marketers, government, and civil society are migrating massively to the networks people construct by themselves and for themselves. At root, social-networking entrepreneurs are really selling spaces in which people can freely and autonomously construct their lives. Sites that attempt to impede free communication are soon abandoned by many users in favor of friendlier and less restricted spaces.

Perhaps the most telling expression of this new freedom is the Internet’s transformation of sociopolitical practices. Messages no longer flow solely from the few to the many, with little interactivity. Now, messages also flow from the many to the many, multimodally and interactively. By disintermediating government and corporate control of communication, horizontal communication networks have created a new landscape of social and political change.

Networked social movements have been particularly active since 2010, notably in the Arab revolutions against dictatorships and the protests against the management of the financial crisis. Online and particularly wireless communication has helped social movements pose more of a challenge to state power.

The Internet and the Web constitute the technological infrastructure of the global network society, and the understanding of their logic is a key field of research. It is only scholarly research that will enable us to cut through the myths surrounding this digital communication technology that is already a second skin for young people, yet continues to feed the fears and the fantasies of those who are still in charge of a society that they barely understand.

Read the full article here.

Keep Reading

Most popular.

Supershoes are reshaping distance running

Kenyan runners, like many others, are grappling with the impact of expensive, high-performance shoes.

• Jonathan W. Rosen archive page

Happy birthday, baby! What the future holds for those born today

An intelligent digital agent could be a companion for life—and other predictions for the next 125 years.

• Kara Platoni archive page

This researcher wants to replace your brain, little by little

The US government just hired a researcher who thinks we can beat aging with fresh cloned bodies and brain updates.

• Antonio Regalado archive page

Here’s how people are actually using AI

Something peculiar and slightly unexpected has happened: people have started forming relationships with AI systems.

• Melissa Heikkilä archive page

Stay connected

Get the latest updates from mit technology review.

Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.

Thank you for submitting your email!

It looks like something went wrong.

We’re having trouble saving your preferences. Try refreshing this page and updating them one more time. If you continue to get this message, reach out to us at [email protected] with a list of newsletters you’d like to receive.

Home — Essay Samples — Information Science and Technology — Internet — The Impact of the Internet

The Impact of The Internet

• Categories: Internet

About this sample

Words: 534 |

Published: Feb 12, 2024

Words: 534 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

References:

• Cerf, G. and Kahn, R. A protocol for packet network interconnection. IEEE Trans. Comm. Tech. Vol. COM-22, V 5. (1974). pp. 627-641.
• Kahn, R. CommunicationsPrinciples for Operating Systems. Internal BBN memorandum, (1972). Pp.44-47.
• Keith, U. Harry, T. and Kahn, R. Proceedings of the IEEE. Special Issue on Packet Communication Networks, Volume 66, No. 11, (1978). Pp.11-14.
• Kleinrock, L. Information Flow in Large Communication Nets. RLE Quarterly Progress Report, (1961). Pp.27-31.
• Roberts, L. & Merrill, T. Toward a Cooperative Network of Time-Shared Computers. Fall AFIPS Conf. (1966). Pp.20-22.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Information Science and Technology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2391 words

4 pages / 1965 words

4 pages / 1603 words

3 pages / 1445 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Internet

The Internet, a global network of interconnected computers, has become an integral part of our daily lives, revolutionizing the way we communicate, work, learn, and entertain ourselves. Since its inception, the Internet has [...]

Internet of Things (IoT) is a system of integrated technology that authorizes interaction of distinctively connected computing devise which could be rooted with other interfaces like humans or machines, associated via wired and [...]

Social media pros and cons are often debated as the influence of these platforms continues to grow. Social media is a term that describes a person’s ability to affect other people’s social thinking in a community. The numerous [...]

The internet has become an integral part of our daily lives, with millions of people around the world using it for various purposes such as communication, research, entertainment, shopping, and more. With the increasing amount [...]

There are a number of potential mechanisms through which Internet use positively affects economic outcomes. Access to the Internet increases information flow which reduces distances between people, firms and nations which in [...]

There are many benefits of Internet of Things ( IoT) in today’s technological era, but we must also remember that with benefits there also con’s, these may involve also challenges and problems that simple can’t be left [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

From Science to Arts, an Inevitable Decision?

The wonderful world of fungi, openmind books, scientific anniversaries, simultaneous translation technology – ever closer to reality, featured author, latest book, the impact of the internet on society: a global perspective, introduction.

The Internet is the decisive technology of the Information Age, as the electrical engine was the vector of technological transformation of the Industrial Age. This global network of computer networks, largely based nowadays on platforms of wireless communication, provides ubiquitous capacity of multimodal, interactive communication in chosen time, transcending space. The Internet is not really a new technology: its ancestor, the Arpanet, was first deployed in 1969 (Abbate 1999). But it was in the 1990s when it was privatized and released from the control of the U.S. Department of Commerce that it diffused around the world at extraordinary speed: in 1996 the first survey of Internet users counted about 40 million; in 2013 they are over 2.5 billion, with China accounting for the largest number of Internet users. Furthermore, for some time the spread of the Internet was limited by the difficulty to lay out land-based telecommunications infrastructure in the emerging countries. This has changed with the explosion of wireless communication in the early twenty-first century. Indeed, in 1991, there were about 16 million subscribers of wireless devices in the world, in 2013 they are close to 7 billion (in a planet of 7.7 billion human beings). Counting on the family and village uses of mobile phones, and taking into consideration the limited use of these devices among children under five years of age, we can say that humankind is now almost entirely connected, albeit with great levels of inequality in the bandwidth as well as in the efficiency and price of the service.

At the heart of these communication networks the Internet ensures the production, distribution, and use of digitized information in all formats. According to the study published by Martin Hilbert in Science (Hilbert and López 2011), 95 percent of all information existing in the planet is digitized and most of it is accessible on the Internet and other computer networks.

The speed and scope of the transformation of our communication environment by Internet and wireless communication has triggered all kind of utopian and dystopian perceptions around the world.

As in all moments of major technological change, people, companies, and institutions feel the depth of the change, but they are often overwhelmed by it, out of sheer ignorance of its effects.

The media aggravate the distorted perception by dwelling into scary reports on the basis of anecdotal observation and biased commentary. If there is a topic in which social sciences, in their diversity, should contribute to the full understanding of the world in which we live, it is precisely the area that has come to be named in academia as Internet Studies. Because, in fact, academic research knows a great deal on the interaction between Internet and society, on the basis of methodologically rigorous empirical research conducted in a plurality of cultural and institutional contexts. Any process of major technological change generates its own mythology. In part because it comes into practice before scientists can assess its effects and implications, so there is always a gap between social change and its understanding. For instance, media often report that intense use of the Internet increases the risk of alienation, isolation, depression, and withdrawal from society. In fact, available evidence shows that there is either no relationship or a positive cumulative relationship between the Internet use and the intensity of sociability. We observe that, overall, the more sociable people are, the more they use the Internet. And the more they use the Internet, the more they increase their sociability online and offline, their civic engagement, and the intensity of family and friendship relationships, in all cultures—with the exception of a couple of early studies of the Internet in the 1990s, corrected by their authors later (Castells 2001; Castells et al. 2007; Rainie and Wellman 2012; Center for the Digital Future 2012 et al.).

Thus, the purpose of this chapter will be to summarize some of the key research findings on the social effects of the Internet relying on the evidence provided by some of the major institutions specialized in the social study of the Internet. More specifically, I will be using the data from the world at large: the World Internet Survey conducted by the Center for the Digital Future, University of Southern California; the reports of the British Computer Society (BCS), using data from the World Values Survey of the University of Michigan; the Nielsen reports for a variety of countries; and the annual reports from the International Telecommunications Union. For data on the United States, I have used the Pew American Life and Internet Project of the Pew Institute. For the United Kingdom, the Oxford Internet Survey from the Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, as well as the Virtual Society Project from the Economic and Social Science Research Council. For Spain, the Project Internet Catalonia of the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3) of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC); the various reports on the information society from Telefónica; and from the Orange Foundation. For Portugal, the Observatório de Sociedade da Informação e do Conhecimento (OSIC) in Lisbon. I would like to emphasize that most of the data in these reports converge toward similar trends. Thus I have selected for my analysis the findings that complement and reinforce each other, offering a consistent picture of the human experience on the Internet in spite of the human diversity.

Given the aim of this publication to reach a broad audience, I will not present in this text the data supporting the analysis presented here. Instead, I am referring the interested reader to the web sources of the research organizations mentioned above, as well as to selected bibliographic references discussing the empirical foundation of the social trends reported here.

Technologies of Freedom, the Network Society, and the Culture of Autonomy

In order to fully understand the effects of the Internet on society, we should remember that technology is material culture. It is produced in a social process in a given institutional environment on the basis of the ideas, values, interests, and knowledge of their producers, both their early producers and their subsequent producers. In this process we must include the users of the technology, who appropriate and adapt the technology rather than adopting it, and by so doing they modify it and produce it in an endless process of interaction between technological production and social use. So, to assess the relevance of Internet in society we must recall the specific characteristics of Internet as a technology. Then we must place it in the context of the transformation of the overall social structure, as well as in relationship to the culture characteristic of this social structure. Indeed, we live in a new social structure, the global network society, characterized by the rise of a new culture, the culture of autonomy.

Internet is a technology of freedom, in the terms coined by Ithiel de Sola Pool in 1973, coming from a libertarian culture, paradoxically financed by the Pentagon for the benefit of scientists, engineers, and their students, with no direct military application in mind (Castells 2001). The expansion of the Internet from the mid-1990s onward resulted from the combination of three main factors:

• The technological discovery of the World Wide Web by Tim Berners-Lee and his willingness to distribute the source code to improve it by the open-source contribution of a global community of users, in continuity with the openness of the TCP/IP Internet protocols. The web keeps running under the same principle of open source. And two-thirds of web servers are operated by Apache, an open-source server program.
• Institutional change in the management of the Internet, keeping it under the loose management of the global Internet community, privatizing it, and allowing both commercial uses and cooperative uses.
• Major changes in social structure, culture, and social behavior: networking as a prevalent organizational form; individuation as the main orientation of social behavior; and the culture of autonomy as the culture of the network society.

I will elaborate on these major trends.

Our society is a network society; that is, a society constructed around personal and organizational networks powered by digital networks and communicated by the Internet. And because networks are global and know no boundaries, the network society is a global network society. This historically specific social structure resulted from the interaction between the emerging technological paradigm based on the digital revolution and some major sociocultural changes. A primary dimension of these changes is what has been labeled the rise of the Me-centered society, or, in sociological terms, the process of individuation, the decline of community understood in terms of space, work, family, and ascription in general. This is not the end of community, and not the end of place-based interaction, but there is a shift toward the reconstruction of social relationships, including strong cultural and personal ties that could be considered a form of community, on the basis of individual interests, values, and projects.

The process of individuation is not just a matter of cultural evolution, it is materially produced by the new forms of organizing economic activities, and social and political life, as I analyzed in my trilogy on the Information Age (Castells 1996–2003). It is based on the transformation of space (metropolitan life), work and economic activity (rise of the networked enterprise and networked work processes), culture and communication (shift from mass communication based on mass media to mass self-communication based on the Internet); on the crisis of the patriarchal family, with increasing autonomy of its individual members; the substitution of media politics for mass party politics; and globalization as the selective networking of places and processes throughout the planet.

But individuation does not mean isolation, or even less the end of community. Sociability is reconstructed as networked individualism and community through a quest for like-minded individuals in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace and the local space. Individuation is the key process in constituting subjects (individual or collective), networking is the organizational form constructed by these subjects; this is the network society, and the form of sociability is what Rainie and Wellman (2012) conceptualized as networked individualism. Network technologies are of course the medium for this new social structure and this new culture (Papacharissi 2010).

As stated above, academic research has established that the Internet does not isolate people, nor does it reduce their sociability; it actually increases sociability, as shown by myself in my studies in Catalonia (Castells 2007), Rainie and Wellman in the United States (2012), Cardoso in Portugal (2010), and the World Internet Survey for the world at large (Center for the Digital Future 2012 et al.). Furthermore, a major study by Michael Willmott for the British Computer Society (Trajectory Partnership 2010) has shown a positive correlation, for individuals and for countries, between the frequency and intensity of the use of the Internet and the psychological indicators of personal happiness. He used global data for 35,000 people obtained from the World Wide Survey of the University of Michigan from 2005 to 2007. Controlling for other factors, the study showed that Internet use empowers people by increasing their feelings of security, personal freedom, and influence, all feelings that have a positive effect on happiness and personal well-being. The effect is particularly positive for people with lower income and who are less qualified, for people in the developing world, and for women. Age does not affect the positive relationship; it is significant for all ages. Why women? Because they are at the center of the network of their families, Internet helps them to organize their lives. Also, it helps them to overcome their isolation, particularly in patriarchal societies. The Internet also contributes to the rise of the culture of autonomy.

The key for the process of individuation is the construction of autonomy by social actors, who become subjects in the process. They do so by defining their specific projects in interaction with, but not submission to, the institutions of society. This is the case for a minority of individuals, but because of their capacity to lead and mobilize they introduce a new culture in every domain of social life: in work (entrepreneurship), in the media (the active audience), in the Internet (the creative user), in the market (the informed and proactive consumer), in education (students as informed critical thinkers, making possible the new frontier of e-learning and m-learning pedagogy), in health (the patient-centered health management system) in e-government (the informed, participatory citizen), in social movements (cultural change from the grassroots, as in feminism or environmentalism), and in politics (the independent-minded citizen able to participate in self-generated political networks).

There is increasing evidence of the direct relationship between the Internet and the rise of social autonomy. From 2002 to 2007 I directed in Catalonia one of the largest studies ever conducted in Europe on the Internet and society, based on 55,000 interviews, one-third of them face to face (IN3 2002–07). As part of this study, my collaborators and I compared the behavior of Internet users to non-Internet users in a sample of 3,000 people, representative of the population of Catalonia. Because in 2003 only about 40 percent of people were Internet users we could really compare the differences in social behavior for users and non-users, something that nowadays would be more difficult given the 79 percent penetration rate of the Internet in Catalonia. Although the data are relatively old, the findings are not, as more recent studies in other countries (particularly in Portugal) appear to confirm the observed trends. We constructed scales of autonomy in different dimensions. Only between 10 and 20 percent of the population, depending on dimensions, were in the high level of autonomy. But we focused on this active segment of the population to explore the role of the Internet in the construction of autonomy. Using factor analysis we identified six major types of autonomy based on projects of individuals according to their practices:

a) professional development b) communicative autonomy c) entrepreneurship d) autonomy of the body e) sociopolitical participation f) personal, individual autonomy

These six types of autonomous practices were statistically independent among themselves. But each one of them correlated positively with Internet use in statistically significant terms, in a self-reinforcing loop (time sequence): the more one person was autonomous, the more she/he used the web, and the more she/he used the web, the more autonomous she/he became (Castells et al. 2007). This is a major empirical finding. Because if the dominant cultural trend in our society is the search for autonomy, and if the Internet powers this search, then we are moving toward a society of assertive individuals and cultural freedom, regardless of the barriers of rigid social organizations inherited from the Industrial Age. From this Internet-based culture of autonomy have emerged a new kind of sociability, networked sociability, and a new kind of sociopolitical practice, networked social movements and networked democracy. I will now turn to the analysis of these two fundamental trends at the source of current processes of social change worldwide.

The Rise of Social Network Sites on the Internet

Since 2002 (creation of Friendster, prior to Facebook) a new socio-technical revolution has taken place on the Internet: the rise of social network sites where now all human activities are present, from personal interaction to business, to work, to culture, to communication, to social movements, and to politics.

Social Network Sites are web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.

(Boyd and Ellison 2007, 2)

Social networking uses, in time globally spent, surpassed e-mail in November 2007. It surpassed e-mail in number of users in July 2009. In terms of users it reached 1 billion by September 2010, with Facebook accounting for about half of it. In 2013 it has almost doubled, particularly because of increasing use in China, India, and Latin America. There is indeed a great diversity of social networking sites (SNS) by countries and cultures. Facebook, started for Harvard-only members in 2004, is present in most of the world, but QQ, Cyworld, and Baidu dominate in China; Orkut in Brazil; Mixi in Japan; etc. In terms of demographics, age is the main differential factor in the use of SNS, with a drop of frequency of use after 50 years of age, and particularly 65. But this is not just a teenager’s activity. The main Facebook U.S. category is in the age group 35–44, whose frequency of use of the site is higher than for younger people. Nearly 60 percent of adults in the U.S. have at least one SNS profile, 30 percent two, and 15 percent three or more. Females are as present as males, except when in a society there is a general gender gap. We observe no differences in education and class, but there is some class specialization of SNS, such as Myspace being lower than FB; LinkedIn is for professionals.

Thus, the most important activity on the Internet at this point in time goes through social networking, and SNS have become the chosen platforms for all kind of activities, not just personal friendships or chatting, but for marketing, e-commerce, education, cultural creativity, media and entertainment distribution, health applications, and sociopolitical activism. This is a significant trend for society at large. Let me explore the meaning of this trend on the basis of the still scant evidence.

Social networking sites are constructed by users themselves building on specific criteria of grouping. There is entrepreneurship in the process of creating sites, then people choose according to their interests and projects. Networks are tailored by people themselves with different levels of profiling and privacy. The key to success is not anonymity, but on the contrary, self-presentation of a real person connecting to real people (in some cases people are excluded from the SNS when they fake their identity). So, it is a self-constructed society by networking connecting to other networks. But this is not a virtual society. There is a close connection between virtual networks and networks in life at large. This is a hybrid world, a real world, not a virtual world or a segregated world.

People build networks to be with others, and to be with others they want to be with on the basis of criteria that include those people who they already know (a selected sub-segment). Most users go on the site every day. It is permanent connectivity. If we needed an answer to what happened to sociability in the Internet world, here it is:

There is a dramatic increase in sociability, but a different kind of sociability, facilitated and dynamized by permanent connectivity and social networking on the web.

Based on the time when Facebook was still releasing data (this time is now gone) we know that in 2009 users spent 500 billion minutes per month. This is not just about friendship or interpersonal communication. People do things together, share, act, exactly as in society, although the personal dimension is always there. Thus, in the U.S. 38 percent of adults share content, 21 percent remix, 14 percent blog, and this is growing exponentially, with development of technology, software, and SNS entrepreneurial initiatives. On Facebook, in 2009 the average user was connected to 60 pages, groups, and events, people interacted per month to 160 million objects (pages, groups, events), the average user created 70 pieces of content per month, and there were 25 billion pieces of content shared per month (web links, news stories, blogs posts, notes, photos). SNS are living spaces connecting all dimensions of people’s experience. This transforms culture because people share experience with a low emotional cost, while saving energy and effort. They transcend time and space, yet they produce content, set up links, and connect practices. It is a constantly networked world in every dimension of human experience. They co-evolve in permanent, multiple interaction. But they choose the terms of their co-evolution.

Thus, people live their physical lives but increasingly connect on multiple dimensions in SNS.

Paradoxically, the virtual life is more social than the physical life, now individualized by the organization of work and urban living.

But people do not live a virtual reality, indeed it is a real virtuality, since social practices, sharing, mixing, and living in society is facilitated in the virtuality, in what I called time ago the “space of flows” (Castells 1996).

Because people are increasingly at ease in the multi-textuality and multidimensionality of the web, marketers, work organizations, service agencies, government, and civil society are migrating massively to the Internet, less and less setting up alternative sites, more and more being present in the networks that people construct by themselves and for themselves, with the help of Internet social networking entrepreneurs, some of whom become billionaires in the process, actually selling freedom and the possibility of the autonomous construction of lives. This is the liberating potential of the Internet made material practice by these social networking sites. The largest of these social networking sites are usually bounded social spaces managed by a company. However, if the company tries to impede free communication it may lose many of its users, because the entry barriers in this industry are very low. A couple of technologically savvy youngsters with little capital can set up a site on the Internet and attract escapees from a more restricted Internet space, as happened to AOL and other networking sites of the first generation, and as could happen to Facebook or any other SNS if they are tempted to tinker with the rules of openness (Facebook tried to make users pay and retracted within days). So, SNS are often a business, but they are in the business of selling freedom, free expression, chosen sociability. When they tinker with this promise they risk their hollowing by net citizens migrating with their friends to more friendly virtual lands.

Perhaps the most telling expression of this new freedom is the transformation of sociopolitical practices on the Internet.

Communication Power: Mass-Self Communication and the Transformation of Politics

Power and counterpower, the foundational relationships of society, are constructed in the human mind, through the construction of meaning and the processing of information according to certain sets of values and interests (Castells 2009).

Ideological apparatuses and the mass media have been key tools of mediating communication and asserting power, and still are. But the rise of a new culture, the culture of autonomy, has found in Internet and mobile communication networks a major medium of mass self-communication and self-organization.

The key source for the social production of meaning is the process of socialized communication. I define communication as the process of sharing meaning through the exchange of information. Socialized communication is the one that exists in the public realm, that has the potential of reaching society at large. Therefore, the battle over the human mind is largely played out in the process of socialized communication. And this is particularly so in the network society, the social structure of the Information Age, which is characterized by the pervasiveness of communication networks in a multimodal hypertext.

The ongoing transformation of communication technology in the digital age extends the reach of communication media to all domains of social life in a network that is at the same time global and local, generic and customized, in an ever-changing pattern.

As a result, power relations, that is the relations that constitute the foundation of all societies, as well as the processes challenging institutionalized power relations, are increasingly shaped and decided in the communication field. Meaningful, conscious communication is what makes humans human. Thus, any major transformation in the technology and organization of communication is of utmost relevance for social change. Over the last four decades the advent of the Internet and of wireless communication has shifted the communication process in society at large from mass communication to mass self-communication. This is from a message sent from one to many with little interactivity to a system based on messages from many to many, multimodal, in chosen time, and with interactivity, so that senders are receivers and receivers are senders. And both have access to a multimodal hypertext in the web that constitutes the endlessly changing backbone of communication processes.

The transformation of communication from mass communication to mass self-communication has contributed decisively to alter the process of social change. As power relationships have always been based on the control of communication and information that feed the neural networks constitutive of the human mind, the rise of horizontal networks of communication has created a new landscape of social and political change by the process of disintermediation of the government and corporate controls over communication. This is the power of the network, as social actors build their own networks on the basis of their projects, values, and interests. The outcome of these processes is open ended and dependent on specific contexts. Freedom, in this case freedom of communicate, does not say anything on the uses of freedom in society. This is to be established by scholarly research. But we need to start from this major historical phenomenon: the building of a global communication network based on the Internet, a technology that embodies the culture of freedom that was at its source.

In the first decade of the twenty-first century there have been multiple social movements around the world that have used the Internet as their space of formation and permanent connectivity, among the movements and with society at large. These networked social movements, formed in the social networking sites on the Internet, have mobilized in the urban space and in the institutional space, inducing new forms of social movements that are the main actors of social change in the network society. Networked social movements have been particularly active since 2010, and especially in the Arab revolutions against dictatorships; in Europe and the U.S. as forms of protest against the management of the financial crisis; in Brazil; in Turkey; in Mexico; and in highly diverse institutional contexts and economic conditions. It is precisely the similarity of the movements in extremely different contexts that allows the formulation of the hypothesis that this is the pattern of social movements characteristic of the global network society. In all cases we observe the capacity of these movements for self-organization, without a central leadership, on the basis of a spontaneous emotional movement. In all cases there is a connection between Internet-based communication, mobile networks, and the mass media in different forms, feeding into each other and amplifying the movement locally and globally.

These movements take place in the context of exploitation and oppression, social tensions and social struggles; but struggles that were not able to successfully challenge the state in other instances of revolt are now powered by the tools of mass self-communication. It is not the technology that induces the movements, but without the technology (Internet and wireless communication) social movements would not take the present form of being a challenge to state power. The fact is that technology is material culture (ideas brought into the design) and the Internet materialized the culture of freedom that, as it has been documented, emerged on American campuses in the 1960s. This culture-made technology is at the source of the new wave of social movements that exemplify the depth of the global impact of the Internet in all spheres of social organization, affecting particularly power relationships, the foundation of the institutions of society. (See case studies and an analytical perspective on the interaction between Internet and networked social movements in Castells 2012.)

The Internet, as all technologies, does not produce effects by itself. Yet, it has specific effects in altering the capacity of the communication system to be organized around flows that are interactive, multimodal, asynchronous or synchronous, global or local, and from many to many, from people to people, from people to objects, and from objects to objects, increasingly relying on the semantic web. How these characteristics affect specific systems of social relationships has to be established by research, and this is what I tried to present in this text. What is clear is that without the Internet we would not have seen the large-scale development of networking as the fundamental mechanism of social structuring and social change in every domain of social life. The Internet, the World Wide Web, and a variety of networks increasingly based on wireless platforms constitute the technological infrastructure of the network society, as the electrical grid and the electrical engine were the support system for the form of social organization that we conceptualized as the industrial society. Thus, as a social construction, this technological system is open ended, as the network society is an open-ended form of social organization that conveys the best and the worse in humankind. Yet, the global network society is our society, and the understanding of its logic on the basis of the interaction between culture, organization, and technology in the formation and development of social and technological networks is a key field of research in the twenty-first century.

We can only make progress in our understanding through the cumulative effort of scholarly research. Only then we will be able to cut through the myths surrounding the key technology of our time. A digital communication technology that is already a second skin for young people, yet it continues to feed the fears and the fantasies of those who are still in charge of a society that they barely understand.

These references are in fact sources of more detailed references specific to each one of the topics analyzed in this text.

Abbate, Janet. A Social History of the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.

Boyd, Danah M., and Nicole B. Ellison. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, no. 1 (2007).

Cardoso, Gustavo, Angus Cheong, and Jeffrey Cole (eds). World Wide Internet: Changing Societies, Economies and Cultures. Macau: University of Macau Press, 2009.

Castells, Manuel. The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. 3 vols. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996–2003.

———. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

———. Communication Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

———. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2012.

Castells, Manuel, Imma Tubella, Teresa Sancho, and Meritxell Roca.

La transición a la sociedad red. Barcelona: Ariel, 2007.

Hilbert, Martin, and Priscilla López. “The World’s Technological Capacity to Store, Communicate, and Compute Information.” Science 332, no. 6025 (April 1, 2011): pp. 60–65.

Papacharissi, Zizi, ed. The Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Networking Sites. Routledge, 2010.

Rainie. Lee, and Barry Wellman. Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012.

Trajectory Partnership (Michael Willmott and Paul Flatters). The Information Dividend: Why IT Makes You “Happier.” Swindon: British Informatics Society Limited, 2010. http://www.bcs.org/upload/pdf/info-dividend-full-report.pdf

Selected Web References.   Used as sources for analysis in the chapter

Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento. “Observatório de Sociedade da Informação e do Conhecimento (OSIC).” http://www.umic.pt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3026&Itemid=167

BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT. “Features, Press and Policy.” http://www.bcs.org/category/7307

Center for the Digital Future. The World Internet Project International Report. 4th ed. Los Angeles: USC Annenberg School, Center for the Digital Future, 2012. http://www.worldinternetproject.net/_files/_Published/_oldis/770_2012wip_report4th_ed.pdf

ESRC (Economic & Social Research Council). “Papers and Reports.” Virtual Society. http://virtualsociety.sbs.ox.ac.uk/reports.htm

Fundación Orange. “Análisis y Prospectiva: Informe eEspaña.” Fundación Orange. http://fundacionorange.es/fundacionorange/analisisprospectiva.html

Fundación Telefónica. “Informes SI.” Fundación Telefónica. http://sociedadinformacion.fundacion.telefonica.com/DYC/SHI/InformesSI/seccion=1190&idioma=es_ES.do

IN3 (Internet Interdisciplinary Institute). UOC. “Project Internet Catalonia (PIC): An Overview.” Internet Interdisciplinary Institute, 2002–07. http://www.uoc.edu/in3/pic/eng/

International Telecommunication Union. “Annual Reports.” http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/sfo/annual_reports/index.html

Nielsen Company. “Reports.” 2013. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/reports/2013.html?tag=Category:Media+ and+Entertainment

Oxford Internet Surveys. “Publications.” http://microsites.oii.ox.ac.uk/oxis/publications

Pew Internet & American Life Project. “Social Networking.” Pew Internet. http://www.pewinternet.org/Topics/Activities-and-Pursuits/Social-Networking.aspx?typeFilter=5

Related publications

• How the Internet Has Changed Everyday Life
• How Is the Internet Changing the Way We Work?
• Hyperhistory, the Emergence of the MASs, and the Design of Infraethics

Download Kindle

Download epub, download pdf, more publications related to this article, more about technology, artificial intelligence, digital world, visionaries, comments on this publication.

Morbi facilisis elit non mi lacinia lacinia. Nunc eleifend aliquet ipsum, nec blandit augue tincidunt nec. Donec scelerisque feugiat lectus nec congue. Quisque tristique tortor vitae turpis euismod, vitae aliquam dolor pretium. Donec luctus posuere ex sit amet scelerisque. Etiam sed neque magna. Mauris non scelerisque lectus. Ut rutrum ex porta, tristique mi vitae, volutpat urna.

Sed in semper tellus, eu efficitur ante. Quisque felis orci, fermentum quis arcu nec, elementum malesuada magna. Nulla vitae finibus ipsum. Aenean vel sapien a magna faucibus tristique ac et ligula. Sed auctor orci metus, vitae egestas libero lacinia quis. Nulla lacus sapien, efficitur mollis nisi tempor, gravida tincidunt sapien. In massa dui, varius vitae iaculis a, dignissim non felis. Ut sagittis pulvinar nisi, at tincidunt metus venenatis a. Ut aliquam scelerisque interdum. Mauris iaculis purus in nulla consequat, sed fermentum sapien condimentum. Aliquam rutrum erat lectus, nec placerat nisl mollis id. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

Nam nisl nisi, efficitur et sem in, molestie vulputate libero. Quisque quis mattis lorem. Nunc quis convallis diam, id tincidunt risus. Donec nisl odio, convallis vel porttitor sit amet, lobortis a ante. Cras dapibus porta nulla, at laoreet quam euismod vitae. Fusce sollicitudin massa magna, eu dignissim magna cursus id. Quisque vel nisl tempus, lobortis nisl a, ornare lacus. Donec ac interdum massa. Curabitur id diam luctus, mollis augue vel, interdum risus. Nam vitae tortor erat. Proin quis tincidunt lorem.

The Internet, Politics and the Politics of Internet Debate

Do you want to stay up to date with our new publications.

Receive the OpenMind newsletter with all the latest contents published on our website

OpenMind Books

• The Search for Alternatives to Fossil Fuels
• View all books

About OpenMind

Connect with us.

• Keep up to date with our newsletter

Quote this content

The Internet in Everyday Life

• December 2002

• The University of Western Ontario

• University of Toronto

• University of Texas at Austin

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Indian J Psychol Med

• Knut Lundby

• Asli Elif Aydin

• Ksenia S. Maksimova
• Vasilisa V. Vakhrusheva
• Alena O. Litvinova

• Hans A. Baer

• Comput Math Organ Theor

• Lab Travail
• Susan D. Amussen
• Keith Wrightson
• David Levine

• Alexis de Tocqueville

• RURAL SOCIOL
• George A. Hillery
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• World Psychiatry
• v.18(2); 2019 Jun

The “online brain”: how the Internet may be changing our cognition

Joseph firth.

1 NICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Westmead, Australia

2 Division of Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

3 Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

John Torous

4 Division of Digital Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Brendon Stubbs

5 Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK

6 Physiotherapy Department, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

Josh A. Firth

7 Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

8 Merton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Genevieve Z. Steiner

9 Translational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia

10 Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK

Mario Alvarez‐Jimenez

11 Orygen, The National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

John Gleeson

12 School of Psychology, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia

Davy Vancampfort

13 Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

14 University Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Christopher J. Armitage

15 NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK

16 NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester, UK

Jerome Sarris

17 Professorial Unit, The Melbourne Clinic, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Australia

The impact of the Internet across multiple aspects of modern society is clear. However, the influence that it may have on our brain structure and functioning remains a central topic of investigation. Here we draw on recent psychological, psychiatric and neuroimaging findings to examine several key hypotheses on how the Internet may be changing our cognition. Specifically, we explore how unique features of the online world may be influencing: a) attentional capacities, as the constantly evolving stream of online information encourages our divided attention across multiple media sources, at the expense of sustained concentration; b) memory processes, as this vast and ubiquitous source of online information begins to shift the way we retrieve, store, and even value knowledge; and c) social cognition, as the ability for online social settings to resemble and evoke real‐world social processes creates a new interplay between the Internet and our social lives, including our self‐concepts and self‐esteem. Overall, the available evidence indicates that the Internet can produce both acute and sustained alterations in each of these areas of cognition, which may be reflected in changes in the brain. However, an emerging priority for future research is to determine the effects of extensive online media usage on cognitive development in youth, and examine how this may differ from cognitive outcomes and brain impact of uses of Internet in the elderly. We conclude by proposing how Internet research could be integrated into broader research settings to study how this unprecedented new facet of society can affect our cognition and the brain across the life course.

The Internet is the most widespread and rapidly adopted technology in the history of humanity. In only decades, Internet use has completely re‐invented the ways in which we search for information, consume media and entertainment, and manage our social networks and relationships. With the even more recent advent of smartphones, Internet access has become portable and ubiquitous to the point at which the population of the developed world can be considered “online” 1 , 2 , 3 .

However, the impact that this new channel for connection, information, communication, and screen time is having on our brains and cognitive functioning is unclear. Prior to the Internet, a large body of research had convincingly demonstrated that the brain is somewhat malleable to environmental demands and stimuli, particularly with regards to learning new processes, due to its capacity for neuroplasticity 4 . Various scenarios have been observed to induce long‐term changes in the neuronal architecture of the human brain, including second‐language acquisition 5 , learning new motor skills (such as juggling) 6 , and even formal education or exam preparation 7 . The widespread use of the Internet across the globe has introduced, for many, the necessity and opportunity to learn a myriad of new skills and ways to interact with society, which could bring about neural changes. As an example, even simple interactions with the Internet through the smartphone's touchscreen interface have been demonstrated to bring about sustained neurocognitive alterations due to neural changes in cortical regions associated with sensory and motor processing of the hand and thumb 8 . Beyond this, the Internet also presents a novel platform for almost‐endless learning of new information and complex processes, relevant to both the online and offline world 9 .

Along with neuroplastic mechanisms, other environmental and biological factors can also cause changes in the brain's structure and function, resulting in cognitive decline 10 . In aging samples, for instance, there is evidence to indicate that age‐related cognitive decline may be partly driven by a process of atrophy. Some studies have shown that adopting a less engaging lifestyle across the lifespan may accelerate loss of cognitive function 11 , due to lower “cognitive reserve” (the ability of the brain to withstand insult from age and/or pathology) 12 . Some emerging evidence indicates that disengaging from the “real world” in favor of virtual settings may similarly induce adverse neurocognitive changes. For example, a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) 13 found that six weeks of engaging in an online role playing game caused significant reductions in grey matter within the orbitofrontal cortex – a brain region implicated in impulse control and decision making. However, the study did not address the extent to which these results were specific to online gaming, rather than general internet usage. Nonetheless, this raises the possibility that various types of Internet usage could differentially affect the brain and cognitive processes – in both adverse and beneficial ways. This may be of particular relevance to the developing brains of children and adolescents, as many cognitive processes (particularly those relevant to higher executive functions and social cognition) are not entirely innate, but rather are strongly influenced by environmental factors 14 .

Although only recently emerging, this possibility has led to a substantial body of research empirically investigating the multiple potential pathways through which the Internet could affect our brains’ structure, function, and cognitive development. Specifically, the bulk of existing research can be separated into three specific domains, examining how the internet is affecting: a) attention (i.e., how the constant influx of online information, prompts and notifications competing for our attention may encourage individuals to displace their concentration across multiple incoming media streams – and the consequences this may have for attentional‐switching versus sustained‐attention tasks); b) memory and knowledge (i.e., the extent to which we rely on the Internet as our primary informational resource, and how unique properties of online information access may affect how we process new memories and value our internal knowledge); c) social cognition (along with the personal and societal consequences of increasingly embedding our social networks, interactions, and status within the online world).

In this state‐of‐the‐art review, we present the current leading hypotheses of how the Internet may alter these cognitive processes, subsequently examining the extent to which these hypotheses are supported by recent findings from psychological, psychiatric and neuroimaging research. In this way, we aggregate the contemporary evidence arising from multiple fields of research to produce revised models on how the Internet may be affecting our brains and cognition. Furthermore, whereas studies to date have focused upon only specific age groups, we examine the effects of the Internet on the human brain across the entire life course. In particular, we explore how the potential benefits/drawbacks of extensive Internet integration with cognitive processes may differ among children and older adults. Finally, we identify important gaps in the existing literature to present key priorities for future research in order to gain new insights for minimizing detrimental effects of the Internet, while capitalizing on this new feature of our societies to potentially influence neurocognitive processes in a beneficial way.

“DIGITAL DISTRACTIONS”: A HIJACK OF ATTENTION ON THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY?

How does the internet gain and sustain our attention.

The Internet consumes a considerable chunk of our attention on a day‐to‐day basis. The vast majority of adults go online daily, and over a quarter report being online “almost constantly” 2 . Within this, one in five American adults are now “smartphone‐only” Internet users 1 . Importantly, the introduction of these Internet‐enabled mobile devices has also reduced the “digital divide” previously experienced by lower and middle income countries 15 . The amount and frequency of Internet usage is even more pronounced amongst younger people. Most adults today witnessed the beginning of the transition from “Internet‐free” to “Internet‐everywhere” societies. However, younger generations (termed “digital natives” 16 ) have been brought up entirely within a “connected world” , particularly in developed countries. Consequently, digital natives are often the first to adopt new online technologies as they arise 16 , and engage extensively with all existing features of the Internet. For instance, 95% of US teens have access to a smartphone, and 45% are online “almost constantly” 3 .

Multiple factors are driving the rapid uptake and extensive usage of Internet‐enabled technologies across the globe. This is partly due to the Internet now being unavoidable, ubiquitous, and a highly functional aspect of modern living. For instance, Internet use is now deeply entwined with education, travel, socializing, commerce, and the majority of workplaces. Along with pragmatic uses, the Internet also offers an endless array of recreational and entertainment activities, through podcasts, e‐books, videos, streaming movies and gaming. However, the ability of the Internet to capture and hold attention is not solely due to the quality of media content available online. Rather, it is also driven by the underlying design and presentation of the online world. One such example is the self‐evolving “attraction mechanism”; whereby aspects of the Internet that fail to gain attention are quickly drowned out in the sea of incoming information, while the successful aspects of the adverts, articles, apps or anything that does manage to capture our attention (even superficially) are logged (through clicks and scrolls), noticed (through online shares), and subsequently proliferated and expanded upon. Alongside this, leading technology companies have been accused of intentionally capitalizing on the addictive potential of Internet, by studying, testing, and refining the attention‐grabbing aspects of their websites and applications (“apps”) to promote extremely high levels of engagement, without due concern for user well‐being 17 .

Furthermore, even when not using the Internet for any specific purpose, smartphones have introduced widespread and habitual “checking” behaviours, characterized by quick but frequent inspections of the device for incoming information from news, social media, or personal contacts 18 . These habits are thought to be the result of behavioural reinforcement from “information rewards” that are received immediately on checking the device 19 , potentially engaging the cortico‐striatal dopaminergic system due to their readily available nature 20 . The variable‐ratio reinforcement schedule inherent to device checking may further perpetuate these compulsive behaviours 21 .

Cognitive consequences of the attention‐grabbing Internet

The unprecedented potential of the Internet to capture our attention presents an urgent need for understanding the impact that this may have on our thought processes and well‐being. Already, education providers are beginning to perceive detrimental effects of the Internet on children's attention, with over 85% of teachers endorsing the statement that “today's digital technologies are creating an easily distracted generation” 22 . The primary hypothesis on how the Internet affects our attentional capacities is through hyperlinks, notifications, and prompts providing a limitless stream of different forms of digital media, thus encouraging us to interact with multiple inputs simultaneously, but only on a shallow level, in a behavioural pattern termed “media multi‐tasking” 23 , 24 .

The seminal study by Ophir et al 23 was among the first to explore the sustained impact of media multi‐tasking on cognitive capacities. This was a cross‐sectional study of individuals who engaged in “heavy” (i.e., frequent and extensive) media multi‐tasking compared to those who did not. Cognitive testing of the two groups produced the then‐surprising finding that those involved in heavy media multi‐tasking performed worse in task‐switching tests than their counterparts – contrary to the authors’ expectation that the “extra practice” afforded by frequent media multi‐tasking would confer cognitive benefit in task‐switching scenarios. Closer inspection of findings suggested that the impeded task‐switching ability in heavy media multi‐tasking individuals was due to their increased susceptibility to distraction from irrelevant environmental stimuli 23 .

Since these initial findings, the effects of media multi‐tasking on cognition have come under increasing scrutiny, because the increasingly diverse forms of entertainment and activities available through the online world can further our capabilities (and temptation) of engaging in media multi‐tasking 25 , even on single devices. For instance, Yeykelis et al 26 measured participants’ media multi‐tasking between different types of online media content while using just one device (personal laptops), and found that switches occurred as frequently as every 19 seconds, with 75% of all on‐screen content being viewed for less than one minute. Measures of skin conductance during the study found that arousal increased in the seconds leading up to media switching, reaching a high point at the moment of the switch, followed by a decline afterward 26 . Again, this suggests that the proclivity for alternating between different computer windows, opening new hyperlinks, and performing new searches could be driven by the readily available nature of the informational rewards, which are potentially awaiting in the unattended media stream. Supporting this, the study also found that, whereas switching from work‐related content to entertainment was associated with increased arousal in anticipation of the switch, there was no anticipatory arousal spike associated with entertainment to work‐content switches 26 .

The growing concern around the increasing amount of media multi‐tasking with the spread of ubiquitous Internet access has resulted in further empirical studies. These have produced conflicting findings, with some failing to find any adverse effects on attention 27 , and others indicating that media multi‐tasking may even be linked to increased performance for other aspects of cognition, such as multisensory integration 28 . Nonetheless the literature, on balance, does seem to indicate that those who engage in frequent and extensive media multi‐tasking in their day‐to‐day lives perform worse in various cognitive tasks than those who do not, particularly for sustained attention 25 .

Imaging studies have shed light onto the neural differences which may account for these cognitive deficits. Functionally, those who engage in heavy media multi‐tasking perform poorer in distracted attention tasks, even though exhibiting greater activity in right prefrontal regions 29 . As right prefrontal regions are typically activated in response to distractor stimuli, the observed increases in recruitment of these regions alongside poorer performance suggests that heavy media multi‐taskers require greater cognitive effort to maintain concentration when faced with distractor stimuli 29 . Structurally, high levels of Internet usage 30 and heavy media multi‐tasking 31 are associated with decreased grey matter in prefrontal regions associated with maintaining goals in face of distraction (such as the right frontal pole and anterior cingulate cortex). However, the findings to date must be interpreted with caution, as various confounding factors may be affecting the results of these cross‐sectional imaging studies. Although the differences persist when controlling for general digital media use and other simple confounders (age, gender, etc.), further research is required to examine if the observed neural differences are specifically attributable to heavy vs. light media multi‐tasking, or in fact driven by broader differences in lifestyle between the two groups.

Given the amount of time that people now spend in media multi‐tasking via personal digital devices, it is increasingly relevant to consider not only sustained changes which arise in those who engage in large amounts of media multi‐tasking, but also the acute effects on immediate cognitive capacities. A meta‐analysis of 41 studies showed that engaging in multi‐tasking was associated with significantly poorer overall cognitive performance, with a moderate‐to‐large effect size (Cohen's d=–0.71, 95% CI: –0.86 to –0.57). This has been confirmed by more recent studies, further showing that even short‐term engagement with an extensively hyperlinked online environment (i.e., online shopping for 15 minutes) reduces attentional scope for a sustained duration after coming offline, whereas reading a magazine does not produce these deficits 32 .

Overall, the available evidence strongly indicates that engaging in multi‐tasking via digital media does not improve our multi‐tasking performance in other settings – and in fact seems to decrease this cognitive capacity through reducing our ability to ignore incoming distractions. Much of the multi‐tasking investigations so far have been focusing on personal computers. However, smartphone technologies may even further encourage people to engage in media multi‐tasking through high rates of incoming prompts from emails, direct messages and social media notifications occurring while both using and not using the device. Thus, along with determining long‐term consequences of media multi‐tasking, future research should examine how the constant multi‐tasking made possible by Internet‐enabled mobile devices may impact daily functioning through acute but high frequency effects.

Furthermore, both the immediate and chronic effects of media multi‐tasking are relatively unexplored in children and adolescents, who are the prime users of such technologies 33 and are at a phase of development that is crucial for refining higher cognitive abilities 14 . The first longitudinal study of media multi‐tasking in young people has recently found that frequent multi‐tasking behaviours do predict the development of attentional deficits specifically in early adolescents, but not in older teens 34 . Additionally, extensive media multi‐tasking during childhood and adolescence could also negatively impact cognitive development through indirect means, by reducing engagement with academic and social activities, as well as by interfering with sleep 35 , or reducing the opportunity to engage in creative thinking 36 , 37 . Clearly, further research is necessary to properly measure the effects of ubiquitous computing on children's cognitive development, and to find practical ways for ameliorating any detrimental impact this may be having.

“iFORMATION”: NEUROCOGNITIVE RESPONSES TO ONLINE INFORMATION GATHERING

The internet and transactive memory.

In response to the question “How has the Internet changed your life?” , some common answers include finding new friends, renewing old friendships, studying online, finding romantic relationships, furthering career opportunities, shopping, and travel 38 . However, the most common answer is people stating that the Internet has “changed the way in which they access information” 38 . Indeed, for the first time in human history, the majority of people living in the developed world have access to almost all factual information in existence literally at their fingertips.

Along with the obvious advantages, this unique situation also introduces the possibility of the Internet ultimately negating or replacing the need for certain human memory systems – particularly for aspects of “semantic memory” (i.e., memory of facts) – which are somewhat independent from other types of memory in the human brain 39 . An initial indication of Internet information gathering affecting typical memory processes was provided by Sparrow et al 40 , who demonstrated that the ability to access information online caused people to become more likely to remember where these facts could be retrieved rather than the facts themselves, indicating that people quickly become reliant on the Internet for information retrieval.

It could be argued that this is not unique to the Internet, but rather just an example of the online world acting as a form of external memory or “transactive memory” 40 , 41 . Transactive memory has been an integral part of human societies for millennia, and refers to the process by which people opt to outsource information to other individuals within their families, communities, etc., such that they are able to just remember the source of the knowledge, rather than attempting to store all of this information themselves 41 . Although beneficial at a group level, using transactive memory systems does reduce an individual's ability to recall the specifics of the externally stored information 42 . This may be due to individuals using transactive memory for “cognitive offloading” , implicitly reducing their allocation of cognitive resources towards remembering this information, since they know this will be available for future reference externally. This phenomenon has been demonstrated in multiple contexts, including those of team work 43 and other “non‐Internet” technologies (e.g., photography reducing individuals’ memories of the objects they photographed) 44 .

However, it is becoming clear that the Internet actually presents something entirely novel and distinct from previous transactive memory systems 45 , 46 . Crucially, the Internet seems to bypass the “transactional” aspect that is inherent to other forms of cognitive offloading in two ways. First, the Internet does not place any responsibility on the user to retain unique information for others to draw upon (as would typically be required in human societies) 45 . Second, unlike other transactive memory stores, the Internet acts as a single entity that is responsible for holding and retrieving virtually all factual information, and thus does not require individuals to remember what exact information is externally stored, or even where it is located. In this way, the Internet is becoming a “supernormal stimulus” 46 for transactive memory – making all other options for cognitive offloading (including books, friends, community) become redundant, as they are outcompeted by the novel capabilities for external information storage and retrieval made possible by the Internet.

How does a supernormal stimulus interact with normal cognition?

Unfortunately, the rapid methods of acquisition and constant availability of information afforded by the Internet may not necessarily lead to better use of information gained. For instance, an experimental study 47 found that individuals instructed to search for specific information online completed the information gathering task faster than those using printed encyclopedias, but were subsequently less able to recall the information accurately.

During Internet and encyclopedia information gathering tasks, functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to examine activation in the ventral and dorsal streams. These regions are referred to as the “what” and “where” streams, respectively, due to their indicated roles in storing either the specific content (ventral stream) or external location (dorsal stream) of incoming information 47 . Although there was no difference in activation of the dorsal stream, results showed that the poorer recall of Internet‐sought information compared to encyclopedia‐based learning was associated with reduced activation of the ventral (“what”) stream during online information gathering. These findings further support the possibility, initially raised by Sparrow et al 40 , that online information gathering, while faster, may fail to sufficiently recruit brain regions for storing information on a long‐term basis.

The potential for online searching to produce a sustained impact upon our cognitive processes has been investigated in a series of studies examining pre‐post changes following a six‐day Internet search training paradigm. In these studies, young adults were given an hour per day of Internet search tasks, and undertook an array of cognitive and neuroimaging assessments pre‐ and post‐training. Results showed that the six‐day Internet search training reduced regional homogeneity and functional connectivity of brain areas involved in long‐term memory formation and retrieval (e.g., temporal gyrus) 48 . This indicates that a reliance on online searching may impede memory retrieval by reducing the functional connectivity and synchronization of associated brain regions 48 . Furthermore, when faced with new questions after the six days, the training had increased participants’ self‐reported impulses towards using the Internet to answer those questions, which was reflected in a recruitment of prefrontal brain areas required for behavioural and impulse control 49 . This increased propensity for relying on Internet searches for gathering new information has been replicated in subsequent studies 50 , and is in keeping with the “supernormal stimulus” nature of the Internet, potentially suggesting that online information gathering quickly trains people to become dependent on this tool when faced with unknown issues.

However, despite the possible adverse effects on regular “offline” memory, the six‐days training did make people more efficient at using the Internet for retrieving information, as participants became faster at the search tasks, with no loss of accuracy 51 . Search training also produced increases in white matter integrity of the fiber tracts connecting the frontal, occipital, parietal and temporal lobes, significantly more than the non‐search control condition 52 . In other studies, cognitive offloading via digital devices has also been found to improve people's ability to focus on aspects that are not immediately retrievable, and thus remember these better in the future 53 .

These findings seem to support the emergent hypotheses that relying on the Internet for factual memory storage may actually produce cognitive benefit in other areas, perhaps by “freeing up” cognitive resources 54 , and thus enabling us to use our newly available cognitive capacities for more ambitious undertakings than previously possible 45 . Researchers advocating this view have pointed to multiple domains of collective human endeavor that have already been transformed by the Internet's provision of supernormal transactive memory, such as education, journalism and even academia 55 . As online technologies continue to advance (particularly with regards to “wearables”), it is conceivable that the performance benefits from the Internet, which are already visible at the societal level, could ultimately become integrated within individuals themselves, enabling new heights of cognitive function 56 .

Unfortunately, however, a more sobering finding with regards to the immediate possibility of ubiquitous Internet access enabling new heights of human intelligence is provided by Barr et al 57 , who observed that analytical thinkers, with higher cognitive capacities, actually use their smartphone less for transactive memory in day‐to‐day situations compared to individuals with non‐analytical thinking styles. Furthermore, the reduced smartphone usage in analytical versus non‐analytical thinkers was specific to online information searching, with no differences in social media or entertainment usages, thus indicating that the differences are likely due to the Internet furthering “cognitive miserliness” among less analytical thinkers 57 .

Alongside this, the increasing reliance on the Internet for information may cause individuals to “blur the lines” between their own capabilities and their devices’ 58 . In a series of experiments, Fisher et al 59 investigated how the Internet influences our self‐perceived knowledge. Results showed that online searching increases our sense of how much we know, even though the illusion of self‐knowledge is only perceived for the domains in which the Internet can “fill in the gaps” for us. The experiments also demonstrated how quickly individuals internalized the Internet's external knowledge as their own – as even immediately after using the Internet to answer the task questions, participants attributed their higher quality explanations to “increased brain activity” . More recent studies have shown that illusions of self‐knowledge similarly persist when using smartphones to retrieve online information 58 . As individuals become more and more connected with their personal digital devices (which are also always accessible), it seems inevitable that the distinction between self and Internet's abilities will become increasingly elusive, potentially creating a constant illusion of “greater than actual knowledge” among large portions of the population.

Overall, the Internet clearly can provide a “superstimulus” for transactive memory, which is already changing the way we store, retrieve, and even value knowledge. However, with popular online information sources such as Google and Wikipedia less than 20 years old, it is currently not possible to ascertain how this may eventually be reflected in long‐term changes to the structure and function of the human brain. Nonetheless, our constant connection with the online world through personal devices (i.e., smartphones), along with the emerging potential for more direct integration through wearable devices, certainly indicates that we are set to become more reliant on the Internet for factual information as time goes on. Also, whereas the studies described above have focused on factual knowledge, the Internet is also now becoming a superstimulus for spatial information (through providing constant access to online maps and global positioning system). As spatial memory is somewhat independent from semantic memory in the human brain 60 , further research should investigate the multitude of ways in which extensive use of these external memory systems may reduce, enhance or alter our cognitive capacities.

ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKS: FAULTY CONNECTIONS, OR FALSE DICHOTOMY?

Human sociality in the online world.

Social relationships and having a sense of connection are important determinants of happiness and stress relief 61 , 62 , mental and physical well‐being 63 , 64 , and even mortality 65 . Over the past decade, the proportion of an individual's social interactions that take place online within social networking sites (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, Twitter) has grown dramatically 66 , 67 , and our connection with these sites is now strongly meshed with the offline world. The real‐world implications of this are perhaps best evidenced by the critical role that social media have played in multiple global affairs, including reportedly starting and precipitating the London Riots, the Occupy movement 68 , and even the Arab Spring 69 , along with potentially influencing the outcomes of the UK's European Union Referendum (“Brexit”) 70 and the 2016 US elections 71 . Clearly, understanding the shift from real‐world interactions into the online social environment (and vice versa) holds significance to almost all aspects of people's lives.

Our motivations towards using social media is broadly similar to the instinctual desires underlying “real world” social interactions, as people are drawn to online sociality in order to exchange information and ideas, along with gaining social support and friendships 72 . However, whether or not these virtual interactions engage the human brain in ways analogous to real‐world socialization remains a topic of debate since the turn of the century 73 . Whereas it would be highly beneficial if social media sites could fulfil the implicit human needs for social connection, it may be that the distinction between online and offline networks is so great that entirely different cognitive domains are involved in navigating these different environments 74 , 75 .

How does the online environment affect our fundamental social structures?

To investigate the neuroimaging correlates of offline and online networks, the seminal study by Kanai et al 74 collected real‐world social network size, online sociality (i.e., Facebook friends) and magnetic resonance imaging scans from 125 participants. Results showed that both real‐world social network size and number of Facebook friends were significantly associated with amygdala volume. As this has previously been established as a key brain region for social cognition and social network size 76 , these results present a strong case for the overlap between online and offline sociality in the human brain.

However, those authors also found that the grey matter volume of other brain regions (specifically, posterior regions of the middle temporal gyrus and superior temporal sulcus, and the right entorhinal cortex) were predicted by the numbers of participants’ Facebook friends, but held no relationship to their real‐world social networks. This suggests that certain unique aspects of social media implicate aspects of the brain that are not central in “real‐world” social settings. For instance, the tendency for online networks to encourage us towards holding many weak social connections, involving thousands of face‐to‐name pairs, could require high associative memory capacities, which is not typically required in real‐world networks (as these are comprised of fewer, but more familiar, relationships) 74 . As associative memory formation for name‐face pairs involves the right entorhinal cortex 77 , 78 , this could explain the exclusive relationship that this region holds with online social (but not real‐world) network size 74 .

Indeed, one key difference which may separate how the brain handles online and offline social networks is the unique capacity afforded by the Internet for people to hold, and simultaneously interact with, millions of “friendships” 79 , 80 . Empirical testing of this hypothesis is a most fruitful area of investigation stemming from research into the fundamental similarities and differences between these two social worlds at a biological level 66 . When defining “friendships” under a broad context (people who maintain contact and share an emotional bond) 66 , two patterns are prominent across a diverse range of real‐world social networks: a) the average individual has around 150 “friendships” (but this is highly variable between individuals), and b) this is made up of five hierarchical layers, consisting of primary partners, intimate relationships, best friends, close friends, and all friends, which follow a size‐scaling ratio of around 3 (i.e., each cumulative layer is 3 times bigger than the last), and therefore have set average (cumulative/inclusive) sizes of 1.5, 5, 15, 50 and 150 respectively 66 . The patterns of the average number of 150 total friendship connections, and the scaling sizes of the five hierarchical layers of relationships making this up, have been found across regions and time periods within various human organizations, ranging from hunter‐gatherer societies 81 , 82 and historical village populations 83 , armies 66 , residential camps 84 , to personal networks of modern Europeans 85 .

Thus, given the unprecedented potential that online social networks allow in terms of number of connections, and the varied contexts these take place over 79 , 80 , it is imaginable that this extraordinary environment may allow these two apparently set aspects of real‐world social networks to be bypassed. However, recent findings have confirmed that user‐to‐user friendship connections, posting patterns and exchanges within Twitter, Facebook, and even online gaming platforms, all indicate a similar average number of general friendships (around 150, despite high skew), along with maintaining the same scaled sizes of the hierarchical structure of the five distinct friendship layers (as determined by reciprocal communication exchanges) 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 . Therefore, even within the unique realms of online social networks, the most fundamental operations of human social networks appear to remain relatively unchanged 88 , 89 . So, it is highly conceivable that the social connections formed in the online world are processed in similar ways to those of the offline world, and thus have much potential to carry over from the Internet to shape “real‐world” sociality, including our social interactions and our perceptions of social hierarchies, in ways that are not restricted to the context of the Internet.

The driving forces that sustain the set structural patterns of social networks, even when faced with the immense connective potential of the online world, may be broadly explained by two overlapping mechanisms. First, constraints on social cognition within the human brain seem to carry over across social contexts 66 . For instance, humans struggle to engagingly interact with more than three individuals simultaneously in the real world, and this limitation on attention also appears to apply online 90 , 91 . This evidence is in agreement with the hypothesis that circumventing the cognitive constraints on social relationships may be difficult even when technology affords unnatural opportunities to do so 88 .

The second driver of set boundaries on social activity is that simple underlying factors may produce social constraints, even within online settings. Most obviously, investment in social relationships is limited by time constraints, and this may contribute to the set patterns of both the number and type of social connections 93 , 94 . In line with this, analyses across various social contexts have shown that temporal limitations govern the number of social interactions that individuals engage in, and how they distribute these across their different kinds of relationships 93 , 94 . Again, these general interaction rates remain similar within online social networks 87 , 88 .

The possibility that the parameters on all social networks (online or offline) are governed by basic underlying factors is further supported by research showing that similar structures also exist within simpler social systems, such as animal societies 66 , 95 . For instance, the sizes and scaling of hierarchical “friendship” layers found in online and offline human networks are also found in dolphins, elephants, and various primate species 96 , and the phenomena of humans increasing the number and strength of their social networks connections following the death of a friend on Facebook 97 is also seen in wild birds, which show compensatory up‐regulation of their social network connections upon experiencing the loss of a social associate 98 .

Supporting the idea that limited cognitive capacities govern our social structures is research showing that the brain regions predicting individual variation in social network size in humans also do so for macaques 99 . Strong support for simple underlying factors (such as time) governing our general patterning of social interactions can be found in studies demonstrating that entirely computationally simulated systems replicate some of the apparent complexities of human social networks, even under relatively simple rules 100 , 101 . Examples include agent‐based models generating similar social layering structures as humans when sociality is defined as time‐limited 100 .

In light of the current evidence regarding how the Internet may have affected human thinking surrounding social networks, it is undeniable that the online environment poses unique potential and context for social activity 79 , 80 , 102 , 103 , which may invoke some non‐identical cognitive processes and brain areas in comparison to the offline world 74 , 75 . Nevertheless, aside from these comparatively fine‐scale differences, it appears that our brains process the online and offline social networks in surprisingly similar ways, as demonstrated by the shared cognitive capacities and simple underlying factors ultimately governing their fundamental structure 87 , 88 . As such, the online social world has very significant implications for not only measuring and understanding human sociality, but also for governing the outcomes of social processes across various aspects of life.

Social cognitive responses to the online social world

Given the evidence above, an appropriate metaphor for the relationship between online and real‐world sociality could be a “new playing field for the same game” . Even beyond the fundamental structure, emerging research suggests that neurocognitive responses to online social occurrences are similar to those of real‐life interactions. For instance, being rejected online has been shown to increase activity in brain regions strongly linked with social cognition and real‐world rejection (medial prefrontal cortex 104 ) in both adults and children 105 , 106 , 107 . However, within the “same old game” of human sociality, online social media is bending some of the rules – potentially at the expense of users 17 . For instance, whereas real‐world acceptance and rejection is often ambiguous and open to self‐interpretation, social media platforms directly quantify our social success (or failure), by providing clear metrics in the form of “friends” , “followers” , and “likes” (or the potentially painful loss/absence of these) 107 . Given the addictive nature of this immediate, self‐defining feedback, social media companies may even capitalize upon this to maximally engage users 17 . However, growing evidence indicates that relying on online feedback for self‐esteem can have adverse effects on young people, particularly those with low social‐emotional well‐being, due to high rates of cyberbullying 108 , increased anxiety and depression 109 , 110 , and increased perceptions of social isolation and exclusion among those who feel rejected online 111 .

Another process common to human social behaviour in both online and offline worlds is the tendency to make upward social comparisons 112 , 113 . Whereas these can be adaptive and beneficial under regular environmental conditions 112 , this implicit cognitive process can also be hijacked by the artificial environmental manufactured on social media 113 , 114 , which showcases hyper‐successful individuals constantly putting their best foot forward, and even using digital manipulation of images to inflate physical attractiveness. By facilitating exposure to these drastically upward social comparisons (which would rarely be encountered in everyday life), online social media can produce unrealistic expectations of oneself – leading to poor body image and negative self‐concept, particularly for younger people 107 , 111 , 115 , 116 . For instance, in adolescents (particularly females), those who spent more time on social media and smartphones have a greater prevalence of mental health problems, including depression, than those who spent more time on “non‐screen” activities 116 , with greater than 5 hrs/day (versus 1 hr/day) associated with a 66% increased risk of one suicide‐related outcome 117 .

However, a causal relationship between high levels of social media use and poorer mental health is currently difficult to establish, as there is most likely a complex interaction between several confounding factors, including reduced sleep and in‐person social interaction, and increased sedentary behaviour and perceived loneliness 116 , 118 . Nonetheless, given the large amounts of social media use observed among young people, future research should thoroughly examine the potentially detrimental effects that this new setting for sociality may have on health and well‐being, along with aiming to establish the driving factors – such that adjustments can be made in subsequent iterations of social media in order to produce more positive outcomes.

Whereas young people with mental disorders may be the most vulnerable to negative input from social media, these media may also present a new platform for improving mental health in this population, if used correctly. In future, social media may also be exploited to promote ongoing engagement with Internet‐based interventions, while addressing key (but frequently neglected) targets such as social connectedness, social support and self‐efficacy, to aim to bring about sustained functional improvements in severe and complex mental health conditions 119 . To achieve these goals, online social media‐based interventions need to be designed to promote engagement by harnessing, in an ethical and transparent manner, effective strategies used by the industry. For instance, developing technologies which are increasingly adopted by online marketing and tech companies, such as natural language processing, sentiment analyses and machine learning, could be capitalized upon, for example making it possible to identify those at increased risk for suicide or relapse 120 , and rationalizing human driven support to those who need it most at the time they need it 121 . In addition, online systems will be able to learn from what helps individuals and when, opening a window into personalized, real time interventions 121 .

While the use of online social media‐based interventions is in its infancy, pioneering efforts indicate that these interventions are safe, engaging, and have the potential to improve clinical and social outcomes in both patients and their relatives 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 . That said, online interventions have failed up to now to be adopted by mental health services 128 , 129 . The main reasons include high attrition rates, poor study designs which reduce translational potential, and a lack of consensus around the required standards of evidence for widespread implementation of Internet‐delivered therapies 130 , 131 , 132 . Efforts are currently underway to determine the long‐term effects of the first generation of social media‐based interventions for mental illness via large randomized controlled trials 133 , 134 . Alongside this clinical use, developing public health strategies for young adults in the general population to avoid the potential adverse effects and negative aspects of typical social media are also warranted.

CONCLUSIONS AND DIRECTIONS

As digital technologies become increasingly integrated with everyday life, the Internet is becoming highly proficient at capturing our attention, while producing a global shift in how people gather information, and connect with one another. In this review, we found emerging support for several hypotheses regarding the pathways through which the Internet is influencing our brains and cognitive processes, particularly with regards to: a) the multi‐faceted stream of incoming information encouraging us to engage in attentional‐switching and “multi‐tasking” , rather than sustained focus; b) the ubiquitous and rapid access to online factual information outcompeting previous transactive systems, and potentially even internal memory processes; c) the online social world paralleling “real world” cognitive processes, and becoming meshed with our offline sociality, introducing the possibility for the special properties of social media to impact on “real life” in unforeseen ways.

However, with fewer than 30 years since the Internet became publicly available, the long‐term effects have yet to be established. Within this, it seems particularly important that future research determines the impact of the Internet on us throughout different points in the lifespan. For instance, the Internet's digital distractions and supernormal capacities for cognitive offloading seem to create a non‐ideal environment for the refinement of higher cognitive functions in critical periods of children and adolescents’ brain development. Indeed, the first longitudinal studies on this topic have found that adverse attentional effects of digital multi‐tasking are particularly pronounced in early adolescence (even compared to older teens) 34 , and that higher frequency of Internet use over 3 years in children is linked with decreased verbal intelligence at follow‐up, along with impeded maturation of both grey and white matter regions 135 .

On the other hand, the opposite may be true in older adults experiencing cognitive decline, for whom the online environment may provide a new source of positive cognitive stimulation. For instance, Internet searching engaged more neural circuitry than reading text pages in Internet savvy older adults (aged 55‐76 years) 9 . Furthermore, experimental studies have found that computer games available online and through smartphones can be used to attenuate aging‐related cognitive decline 136 , 137 , 138 . Thus, the Internet may present a novel and accessible platform for adults to maintain cognitive function throughout old age. Building from this, successful cognitive aging has previously been shown to be dependent upon learning and deploying cognitive strategies, which can compensate for aging‐related decline in “raw” memory capacities 139 . This has previously been referred to as optimizing internal cognitive processes (e.g., through mnemonic strategies), or taking advantage of cognitive offloading in traditional formats (list making, transactive memory, etc.) 139 . Nonetheless, as Internet‐based technologies become more deeply integrated with our daily cognitive processing (through smartphones, wearables, etc.), digital natives could feasibly develop forms of “online cognition” in the aging brain, whereby older adults can increasingly take advantage of web‐based transactive memory and other emerging online processes to fulfil (or even exceed) the typical capacities of a younger brain.

Although it is an emerging area of study, the same could apply for social aspects of the online world. Whereas young people seem particularly prone to the rejections, peer pressure, and negative appraisals this world may induce 107 , older adults may ultimately be able to harness social media in order to overcome isolation and thus continue to benefit from the diverse range of physical, mental and neurocognitive benefits associated with social connection 73 . Viewed collectively, the nascent research in this area already indicates that equivalent types of Internet usage may have differential effects on individuals’ cognitive and social functioning depending on their point in the lifespan.

For better or for worse, we are already conducting a mass‐scale experiment of extensive Internet usage across the global population. A more fine‐scale analysis is essential to gaining a fuller understanding of the sustained impact of this usage across our society. This could include measuring frequency, duration and types of Internet usage as a standard part of national data projects, for instance through collecting Internet data (from either device‐based or self‐report measures) in “biobank” assessment protocols. Combining this with the extensive genetic, socio‐demographic, lifestyle and neuroimaging data gathered by some ongoing projects, researchers could be able to establish the impact of Internet usage on psychological well‐being and brain functioning across entire populations (rather than the currently limited study samples), while also controlling for multiple confounders.

Overall, this early phase of the Internet's introduction into our society is a crucial period for commencing rigorous and extensive research into how different types of Internet usage interact with human cognition, in order to maximize our opportunities for harnessing this new tool in a beneficial manner, while minimizing the potentially adverse effects.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

J. Firth is supported by a Blackmores Institute Fellowship. J. Sarris is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Research Fellowship (APP1125000). B. Stubbs is supported by the Health Education England and the National Institute for Health Research Integrated Clinical Academic Programme Clinical Lectureship (ICA‐CL‐2017‐03‐001). G.Z. Steiner is supported by an NHMRC‐Australian Research Council (ARC) Dementia Research Development Fellowship (APP1102532). M. Alvarez‐Jimenez is supported by an NHMRC Career Development Fellowship (APP1082934). C.J. Armitage is supported by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Manchester Biomedical Research Centre and NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the above‐mentioned entities.

Every print subscription comes with full digital access

Science News

How the internet will change the world — even more.

By Lee Rainie

March 26, 2010 at 1:55 pm

Share this:

Recently, 895 Web experts and users were asked by the Pew Research Center and the Imagining the Internet Center at Elon University in North Carolina to assess predictions about technology and its effects on society in the year 2020. Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Internet & American Life Project in Washington, D.C., discussed the survey’s findings with Science News contributing correspondent Susan Gaidos.

This is your fourth “Future of the Internet” survey. Are there any themes that have come through all of the surveys?

There’s a broad feeling among technologists that technology itself is going to improve, come what may. That computing power, bandwidth, storage capacity, even our ability to pack pixels into screens, is going to keep improving.

At the same time, there is worry that humans and their institutions will not adapt as well as they might under these circumstances. We’re slow to adjust, and the technologies themselves are introducing so many new elements to life that people will potentially have a hard time adjusting to that. There’s a sense that people are marching not necessarily blindly, but certainly without full knowledge, into a future that they don’t fully know. They’re thrilled with their gadgets but they don’t know what their gadgets are doing to them.

In this era of social media, how will privacy and anonymity be maintained?

Anonymity will be harder to maintain. There are too many threats that are posed by people being allowed to do anything they want without any level of accountability or authentication. There will still be chances for anonymous encounters, but they will be in special environments in special ways.

We’re in an environment now where lots of personal sharing is going on. The experts anticipate that a new sensibility would emerge called “reputation management.” There will be tools that allow people to erase all the goofy things that they did in college, if they want to. People will be able to essentially crowd out bad information about themselves by getting better information out there and making it more prominent, more linked to or more easily findable.

The majority of experts agreed that by 2020, people’s use of the Internet will enhance human intelligence. How so?

The Web is shifting the needs that we have in our lives and the functions that we can perform, so there will be some cognitive shifting that goes on. We don’t have to remember as much stuff, for example, so there might be a shift in cognitive abilities over time from less memorization and storage. New literacies will be required such as screen literacy. Reading, writing, arithmetic and retrieval will become key, as people who can find [information] fastest and make sense of it will be at a marked advantage over those who struggle to find information and have less capacity to synthesize and organize this wealth of data that we have.

In what other realms of life did people anticipate improvements?

There’s almost a uniform feeling that health care will get better. Mobile technology and wearable devices will be able to give real-time feedback about people’s health status.  That will potentially be a life-changing event for the chronically ill or for people who have to manage their care in a deliberate way. That the capacity to interact with a doctor — either through devices or through communications that don’t involve office visits — will improve interactions and empower people in important new ways to be managers of their own health care.

The education story is a different one. There’s hope that education will change, but some despair that it’s not changing fast enough. Kids are still being taught largely in the same format and environment that their great-grandparents were — with students of the same age sitting in a classroom riveted on the all-knowing teacher.

Technologists think that that model will break down at some point and a very different set of activities will define formal education. It won’t necessarily be people of the same age, they won’t necessarily be in the same place. What will organize them is their proficiency in a subject and their interest in a subject.

There’s also hope invested in e-government and civic activity. People have new ways to engage with each other and their leaders about social activity, and to engage with the governmental agencies that are entrusted to act in those areas. The technology community has high hopes that these tools will be deployed in more interesting and exciting new ways so that we’ll see more government data and will be able to make smarter policies because of that.

Subscribers, enter your e-mail address for full access to the Science News archives and digital editions.

Not a subscriber? Become one now .

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Importance of Internet: Samples for Students

• Updated on  
• Jun 20, 2024

Internet is not just a need or luxury, it has become a household necessity. It was used as a source of entertainment but now it is impossible to work in offices or study without the Internet. When the global pandemic locked everyone in their house, it became an important medium to connect, study and work. Students were able to study without the risk of catching COVID-19 because of the Internet. The importance of the internet is also a common topic in various entrance exams such as SAT , TOEFL , and UPSC . In this blog, you will learn how to write an essay on the importance of the Internet.

This Blog Includes:

Tips to write the perfect essay on internet, sample 1 of essay on the importance of the internet (100 words), sample essay 2 – importance of the internet (150 words), sample essay 3 on use of internet for student (300 words).

Also Read: Essay on Yoga Day

Also Read: Speech on Yoga Day

Now the task of essay writing may not always be easy, hence candidates must always know a few tips to write the perfect essay. Mentioned below are a few tips for writing the correct essay:

• Prepare a basic outline to make sure there is continuity and relevance and no break in the structure of the essay
• Follow a given structure. Begin with an introduction then move on to the body which should be detailed and encapsulate the essence of the topic and finally the conclusion for readers to be able to comprehend the essay in a certain manner
• Students can also try to include solutions in their conclusion to make the essay insightful and lucrative to read.

Also Read: UPSC Essay Topics

The last few years have witnessed heavy reliance on the Internet. This has been because of multiple advantages that it has to offer – for instance, reducing work stress and changing the face of communication most importantly. If we take the current scenario, we cannot ignore how important the Internet is in our everyday lives. It is now indeed a challenging task to visualize a world without the internet. One may define the internet as a large library composed of stuff like – records, pictures, websites, and pieces of information. Another sector in which the internet has an undeniably important role to play is the field of communication. Without access to the internet, the ability to share thoughts and ideas across the globe would have also been just a dream. 

Also Read: IELTS Essay Topics

With the significant progress in technology, the importance of the internet has only multiplied with time. The dependence on the internet has been because of multiple advantages that it has to offer – for instance, reducing work stress and changing the face of communication most importantly. By employing the correct usage of the internet, we can find various information about the world. The internet hosts Wikipedia, which is considered to be one of the largest best-composed reference books kept up by a vast community of volunteer scholars and editors from all over the world. Through the internet, one may get answers to all their curiosity.

In the education sector too, it plays a major role, especially taking into consideration the pandemic. The Internet during the pandemic provided an easy alternative to replace the traditional education system and offers additional resources for studying, students can take their classes in the comforts of their homes. Through the internet, they can also browse for classes – lectures at no extra cost. The presence of the Internet is slowly replacing the use of traditional newspapers. It offers various recreational advantages as well. It can be correctly said that the internet plays a great role in the enhancement of quality of life.

Also Read: TOEFL Sample Essays

One may correctly define the 21st century as the age of science and technology. However, this has been possible not only by the efforts of the current generation but also by the previous generation. The result of one such advancement in the field of science and technology is the Internet. What is the Internet? So the internet can be called a connected group of networks that enable electronic communication. It is considered to be the world’s largest communication connecting millions of users.

The dependence on the internet has been because of multiple advantages that it has to offer – for instance, reducing work stress and changing the face of communication most importantly. Given the current scenario, the Internet has become a massive part of our daily lives, and it is now a challenging task to imagine the world without the Internet. The importance of the Internet in the field of communication definitely cannot be ignored.

Without access to the internet, the ability to share thoughts and ideas across the globe would have been just a dream. Today we can talk to people all over the globe only because of services like email, messenger, etc that are heavily reliant on the internet. Without the internet, it would be hard to imagine how large the world would be. The advent of the internet has made the task of building global friendships very easy.

The youth is mainly attracted by entertainment services. Streaming platforms like Amazon , Netflix, and YouTube have also gained immense popularity among internet users over the past few years. The presence of the Internet is slowly replacing the use of traditional newspapers among people too. 

In addition to these, it has various recreational advantages to offer as well. For instance, people can search for fun videos to watch and play games online with friends and other people all over the globe. Hence, we can say the internet holds immense importance in today’s era. Internet technology has indeed changed the dynamics of how we communicate, respond or entertain ourselves. Its importance in everyday life is never-ending. It can be correctly said that the internet plays a great role in the enhancement of quality of life. In the future too, we will see further changes in technology .

Also Read: SAT to Drop Optional Essays and Subject Tests from the Exam

Related Articles

The internet provides us with facts and data, as well as information and knowledge, to aid in our personal, social, and economic development. The internet has various applications; nevertheless, how we utilize it in our daily lives is determined by our particular needs and ambitions.

Here are five uses of the internet: email; sharing of files; watching movies and listening to songs; research purposes; and education.

The Internet has also altered our interactions with our families, friends, and life partners. Everyone is now connected to everyone else in a more simplified, accessible, and immediate manner; we can conduct part of our personal relationships using our laptops, smartphones, and tablets.

This was all about an essay on importance of Internet. The skill of writing an essay comes in handy when appearing for standardized language tests. Thinking of taking one soon? Leverage Live provides the best online test prep for the same. Register today to know more!

Nikita Puri

Nikita is a creative writer and editor, who is always ready to learn new skills. She has great knowledge about study abroad universities, researching and writing blogs about them. Being a perfectionist, she has a habit of keeping her tasks complete on time before the OCD hits her. When Nikita is not busy working, you can find her eating while binge-watching The office. Also, she breathes music. She has done her bachelor's from Delhi University and her master's from Jamia Millia Islamia.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Thank you! Watch our space for more informative blogs!

Thank you very much ! This helped me to write about internet .

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication Research Paper

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

The progress of the digital era is one of the most discussed topics today, and people are free to introduce their attitudes toward the Internet and online services. On the one hand, the Internet performs a critical function of global connection. Finding the necessary information and sharing data does not take much time. On the other hand, it is wrong to neglect that the Internet has changed the quality of interpersonal communication and decreased the number of real-life meetings. This paper aims to answer the question, “How does the Internet affect human relationships and communication processes?” Despite the evident benefits of the Internet in human life, like time-saving and the content of exchanged information, the challenges of interpersonal communication continue to decrease the worth of nonverbal components and privacy issues.

It is hard to imagine this life without the Internet, and the possibility of saving time remains an important benefit in the context of interpersonal communication. In their intention to improve relationships, people try to use a single chance to share data in a timely manner. Sam defines the Internet as a “global village, transcending the boundaries of time and space” (473). Several years ago, society was concerned about the inability to find enough time and space to find the material, report on the event, or demonstrate personal opinions. Today, it is easy to create a post, record a video, or leave a comment from any part of the world. The Internet has facilitated interpersonal communication by significantly reducing time frames.

Another consequence of using the Internet for interpersonal communication is improved content expansion. Most individuals first grab their phones or other digital devices that connect them with the entire world when they wake up. According to Ruben et al., it does not matter if a person turns on the phone to scroll through Facebook or add another picture of their Outfit of the Day; the idea remains the same – the Internet is inevitable. Sometimes, people need more details about the situation or clear evidence not to be alone in this world (Sam 474). The Internet is a connection that is not determined by the weight or physical size of the message. Users can print words, send audio files, share video material, and exchange pictures. Thus, the Internet positively affects interpersonal communication due to a great opportunity of exchanging different types of personal and public information.

At the same time, any impact can be interpreted in different ways, and, together with evident advantages, the Internet may challenge interpersonal communication because of poorly interpreted nonverbal language. Technology-mediated communication is developed in various ways, but nonverbal behavior cues are frequently absent (Ruben et al.). Human gestures, voice tones, physical appearances, touches, and gazes are necessary to express relative status and define relationship roles in everyday life and business (Goman). The Internet transfers visual information but does not contribute to the appropriate interpretation of the material. Still, it is human nature to pay attention to nonverbal responses and “all of the emotional nuance behind the words,” either consciously or unconsciously (Goman). Digital communication is not as powerful and all-encompassing as face-to-face interaction. Many critical elements are neglected, which deprives people of observing many things and details. The Internet damages the quality of interpersonal communication due to the absence of body language and physical cues.

Finally, when people initiate communication processes, they expect their information to be private and personal, which is not always possible on the Internet. Digitalization and globalization are usually associated with vast opportunities and unlimited knowledge. Despite multiple attempts to strengthen the global politics of cyber systems, privacy complications continue emerging, and personal data protection is dramatically challenged (DeNardis 60). Many invisible threats exist even if people think they are alone in the room. For example, camera surveillance and video recording may be stored with the help of cloud services without even notifying users (DeNardis 60). There are many ways to circumvent privacy agreements, and interpersonal communication can never be the same as the one when two people talk to each other face to face. The Internet did not pursue such purposes when it was introduced for public usage, but hackers and technical experts developed their skills to penetrate private human lives in the most meticulous ways.

In conclusion, the impact of the Internet on interpersonal communication is associated with different benefits and shortages. People are easily fascinated with the number of digitalized opportunities they get when they choose the Internet for communication. They enjoy the absence of geographical boundaries, distance, and time limitations and exchange pictures and voices in a convenient way. At the same time, the lack of understanding of nonverbal communication and no privacy questions the appropriateness of the Internet for personal communication. Many individuals need to have guarantees and control their words and information distribution. The Internet facilitates many processes as well as creates additional problems that people need to consider if they want to enjoy their interpersonal relationships and communication. It is high time to realize the difference between online and face-to-face communication to prevent damage and gain personal profits.

Works Cited

DeNardis, Laura. The Internet in Everything: Freedom and Security in a World with No Off Switch . Yale University Press, 2020.

Goman, Carol Kinsey. “Has Technology Killed Face-To-Face Communication?” Forbes , Web.

Ruben, Mollie A., et al. “Is Technology Enhancing or Hindering Interpersonal Communication? A Framework and Preliminary Results to Examine the Relationship Between Technology Use and Nonverbal Decoding Skill.” Frontiers , Web.

Sam, Susan. “Impact of Internet on Interpersonal Relationships.” International Journal of Home Science, vol. 5, no. 2, 2019, pp. 473-476.

• Internal Communication: Medium and Justification
• The Importance of Communication Filters
• Interpersonal Communication in the Digital Era
• Staff Turnover in the Face-To-Face Marketing Business
• Telepsychiatry as an Alternative For Face-to-Face Psychiatric Intervention
• Reflecting on Group Presentation with Rolfe's Reflective Cycle
• “The Future of Lying” TED Talk by Jeff Hancock
• Professional Communication: "Brick by Brick" by Douglas
• Speech Preparation Outline: Importance of Taking Public Speaking Classes
• How to Communicate Ethically in the Digital World
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 16). The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-internet-impact-on-interpersonal-communication/

"The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication." IvyPanda , 16 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/the-internet-impact-on-interpersonal-communication/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication'. 16 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication." October 16, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-internet-impact-on-interpersonal-communication/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication." October 16, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-internet-impact-on-interpersonal-communication/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Internet Impact on Interpersonal Communication." October 16, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-internet-impact-on-interpersonal-communication/.

A Brave New World: How the Internet Affects Societies

Meeting summary (11 may 2017).

Professor Dr Erik Huizer

Chief Technology Officer, SURFnet; Research Associate, University of Utrecht; Internet Hall of Fame Inductee

Syed Ismail Shah

Chairman, Pakistan Telecommunications Authority

James Arroyo OBE

The Ditchley Foundation

Dr Unoma Ndii Okorafor

Founder & CEO, WAAW Foundation; Co-Founder & CEO, Radicube Technologies

Rebecca MacKinnon

Director, Ranking Digital Rights, New America

Introduction

With the rise of the Internet in recent decades, its impact on society has been transformative at multiple levels – including in communication, access to knowledge and social interaction.

While early adopters saw possibilities in using the Internet as a vehicle through which the many challenges facing the world might be addressed, more recently questions have arisen about how Internet technology can be used to spread false and misleading information, and to radicalize and recruit potential terrorists. There are also concerns as to whether the Internet serves to reduce or exacerbate social divisions; and whether it contributes to the dilution of social norms or, conversely, serves as a channel to perpetuate them.

In this context, the technical community has initiated a conversation about the role that the Internet is – and should be – playing in societies. Notably, for some within the technical community, there is growing unease that the very technologies that supported Internet growth are also enabling behaviours that are socially unacceptable, putting pressure on the way people use and experience the online environment.

On 11 May 2017 the Internet Society and Chatham House convened a roundtable discussion, held under the Chatham House Rule, [1]  at which a culturally and geographically diverse set of participants examined questions relating to how the Internet affects social norms and societies as a whole, as well as its impact on people’s daily lives.

Access, capacity and the developing world

The Internet is for everyone, according to the Internet Society’s vision, but it has not quite happened for all. Access to the Internet is essential for empowerment of certain groups, especially women, connecting them with global markets and communities. Yet, women in Africa are 50 per cent less likely to be online than men; and there are digital divides also affecting people with disabilities, and people lacking digital skills.

The Internet in the developing world

An Internet Society survey of 2,100 people across the world has found that people in developing markets remain optimistic that the benefits of connecting far outweigh the perceived risks. On the contrary, in the Western hemisphere, conversations about the Internet risk losing the sense of genuine excitement and urgency that many in developing countries feel about getting online.

The mobile Internet has been a game changer in developing countries. In Pakistan there were 3.79 million broadband connections through 3G in 2013. In just three years, however, the advent of 4G has increased the number of mobile broadband connections to 43 million. For regulators in developing countries, the first step is to bring people online, and after that to focus on new services. For example, graduates in Pakistan increasingly want to be entrepreneurs rather than be employed by others. Entrepreneurial activity, in turn, increases financial inclusion: Pakistan’s vision is now that by 2020 50 per cent will have their own bank account.

Digital divides

Connectivity is growing fast, but some places are not doing as well as others. ‘Access’ is not as simple as giving people connection to the Internet. There are multiple, multi-dimensional factors contributing to digital divides, chief among them gender, access to education and skills, lack of locally relevant content, lack of human capacity, and weak local supply chains. All these issues need to be addressed if the vision of the ‘Internet for everyone’ is to be achieved.

In particular, a lack of localized content risks turning Internet users from developing countries into consumers rather than creators. An estimated 90 per cent of jobs that will be created over the next decade will require technical skills, and Africa will be, in demographic terms, the youngest continent. There is an urgent need to develop relevant skills to both preserve and expand opportunities for all.

At the same time, technological innovations are further deepening divides. There is a risk that greater digital inequality will spread within countries – between those who are connected and those who are not. This inequality will affect jobs and the economic performance of countries and communities. In a scenario in which there is likely to be a threshold for innovation to see gains in the economy, without proper access and education many people will be left behind.

On the more positive side, the spread of Internet uptake can also work to address divides within societies. In Pakistan, for example, some 70 per cent of medical students are women, but for cultural reasons only 20–30 per cent of practising doctors are women – even though many female patients prefer to be seen by a female doctor. There are successful examples of using technology to bring women and girls into the workforce, for example by enabling women to access female doctors via remote consultations. As another example of the interplay between local and global, Pakistan is home to one of the world’s largest ‘virtual’ universities, established in 2002.

Trust and fear in the online environment: the ‘silent majority’ is vanishing

A case can be made that, in the ‘real’ world, the Chatham House Rule is comparable with the Internet Society’s vision of the ‘Internet for everyone’. The Rule is intended to ensure that people can speak openly and freely, but also securely. It provides a channel for an issue to be thoroughly debated, and this lends legitimacy. Members of the technical community may view confidentiality as secrecy, but on difficult issues people of good faith need some room to talk and interact freely.

Online debate

The confidentiality offered by the Chatham House Rule encourages people to speak freely, but its efficacy depends on physical meetings in the real world, at which the presence of a silent majority plays an important role in curbing extreme behaviour. No equivalent mechanism exists in the online environment: the silent majority is not only silent, but invisible. As a result, debate can spin out of control.

One speaker remarked that ‘fear is trumping trust’ online. It is important that people are able to speak freely online, but there is no shared moral and/or cultural code influencing how people behave. The risk, therefore, is that online debate is reduced to the lowest common denominator: ‘Civil debate according to the Chatham House Rule is hardly possible online. This leads to a sort of extreme behaviour in debates, which in turn leads to self-censorship.’

Real-world implications

A case can be made that in some instances hate speech may provoke actions in the real world that threaten the personal safety of many. In Rwanda, for example, where ‘hate media’ had a role in fuelling the genocide in 1994, the government is now attempting to restrict what is published online. In early 2017 the government of Cameroon blocked Internet access for the English-speaking part of the country for 93 days. The government said that it reserved the right to stop the Internet being used as a tool to stoke internal division and hatred. However, Internet filtering and shutdowns create extensive collateral damage, and have, in the case of Cameroon, for example, been condemned by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression as an ‘appalling violation’ of the right of freedom of expression.

Globalization and the Internet as an engine for economic growth

Governments around the world recognize that the Internet is an engine of growth. States are committed to connecting more people (1.5 billion by 2020, in line with the ITU target) to advance the gains that can be made from the Internet economy.

The evolution of the Internet, particularly from the 1990s, has coincided with the end of the post-war East–West order (the so-called ‘end of history’), and the advance of globalization. Whereas diplomacy has traditionally depended on adapting behaviour to local culture in order to reduce friction, what is new is that the Internet effectively ‘collapses’ concepts of place, and, with that, the ability to hold separate value systems in different places.

The role of the state

Workshop participants discussed the appropriate role of the state in an increasingly globalized – but simultaneously fragmented – world. Explicitly Western values have driven the agenda to date, and states that do not buy into those values will view the Internet’s advance as a direct threat. Internet policy dialogue tends to lump non-Western countries or governments together, as though they are all alike. However, there are certain ‘rule-of-law’ states that place more value on social responsibility and cohesion than on individual personal expression. The challenge for states is thus to figure out how to work together without necessarily quite agreeing on such values.

In the opinion of one speaker, quick change will be resisted and conflict is likely to occur. Another disagreed, contending that the Internet’s values are aligned with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

There are conflicts between the principles of state sovereignty and globalization. Internet regulation is mostly confined within state borders, but both regulation and technical decisions can have global impacts. One participant asked if it remains accurate to view the Internet as a global network. Other participants noted that the Internet is not just creating challenges for regulation between states because of diminishing borders, but also within the national state bureaucracy. As regards the latter, the Internet has forced a change in the jurisdiction of certain agencies – for example, branches concerned with communication are now asking about their role in the privacy debate – and there is increasing strain placed on governments as these agency jurisdictions continue to blur.

The evolving security challenge

The growth of the Internet has been hugely disruptive to intelligence services. Disruption and encryption have bitten into traditional intelligence models. Agencies are now learning to embrace the Internet to deal with the evolving threats of terrorism and non-state actors. While acknowledging that bulk powers have their critics, one speaker expressed the view that the UK Investigatory Powers Act (2016) is modernizing how intelligence agencies collect evidence.

In the past, when government organizations thought about Internet security, they focused on the top 5 per cent of high-risk events, such as attacks on critical infrastructure. While potentially devastating, such attacks are rare compared with the constant barrage of cyber incidents affecting the population at large. As a result, governments are increasingly concerned with the Internet as it relates to civilian usage. Moreover, the evolution of the modern Internet has led to non-state actors, such as terrorists and hackers, posing security threats to states. Governments are still learning how to respect the privacy of individuals’ communications in the context of criminal investigations.

One participant noted that there has been a ‘market failure’ in security, and that citizens are not managing risks sufficiently. The UK government, for example, has responded at the national level by creating the National Cyber Security Centre.

The Internet of things

The Internet of things (IoT) also poses a big challenge to security. In the next 10 years an estimated 30 billion connected devices will come online. The growth in IoT marketing and innovation has outpaced security, and there are no good economic incentives in place to promote security. Many traditional companies that had nothing to do with information technology are now in effect becoming IT companies, but do not understand how their products can create vulnerability in the network. In this context, how do we continue to connect more devices and gadgets to the network without creating further vulnerability and insecurity? The second challenge around IoT and security pertains to data collection. Most of the focus for regulation is on visible – or physical – things, such as actual devices and gadgets. One participant suggested that as IoT exists in the cloud, that is where security and privacy solutions may be effective.

State regulation in a global world

One speaker described the present situation as a ‘Magna Carta moment’ – a general realization that ‘we don’t have the right structures to address the problems we’re facing’. ‘The nation state system of governance … for national and international and corporate governance are not fit for purpose to deal with the issues we’re facing.’ There is a need to bring together the right stakeholders to address the problems.

Other participants noted that regulation by the state can resolve many of the current problems, such as market failure around security.

When governments make local laws, they need to recognize that they are part of a broader, global system. Therefore, in one speaker’s view, governments need to be accountable not only to their own people, but to everyone on the network.

Others advocated less regulation, making the case instead for raising awareness of the opportunities the Internet brings. One participant asked if governments should be more visible in Internet regulation. Should there be a ‘complaints department’ for consumers at a national level, for example? Or should companies be forced to be more open by allowing algorithms to be reviewed by regulators to help prevent bias? Another noted that the media and the public sphere have become less transparent, and if the state does not play a part in regulating private companies, the data they collect, and the algorithms they operate, then there will be an imbalance.

Democracy and corporate power

Events in 2016 brought surprises in terms of democratic outcomes. Notably, following the Brexit referendum in the UK and the outcome of the US elections, many people are worried about the role of social media in creating filter bubbles and echo chambers, and in spreading fake news.

Extreme behaviour

One speaker raised the point that the vast majority of extreme behaviour is played out on two platforms with the largest user bases. There have been numerous attempts to develop norms of behaviour, or create technical solutions that could filter extreme material. It was only when advertisers started to abandon the platforms because they saw their brands being damaged by association that the platforms did anything about it.

The role of companies

While there has been increased transparency about how companies are responding to requests from governments for user data, there is little publicly available information about firms’ internal processes to moderate content on their platforms. Companies have done a good job in removing images of child abuse, for example, but a poor job in relation to images of breast feeding, or nudity in art. There is also a concern that, where governments are putting pressure on social media companies to take down allegedly extremist material, this may unjustifiably also target the work of human rights activists and journalists.

As recently as 2011, the discussion about the relationship between social media and democracy would have been very different. One participant noted that social networks were initially viewed as a democratizing force, but now the world is seeing the negative impacts that social media can have on society. One participant framed this as a transition from an ‘algorithm-less’ world to one that is ‘algorithm-full’. Another participant noted that, previously, the algorithms used to provide consumers of social media with information were often viewed as neutral. However, events in 2016 have changed people’s perspectives on how social media algorithms can create bias and perpetuate false information. Although the Internet feels like a public space, it is built on private infrastructure; and the companies that control these algorithms hold a great deal of unaccountable power.

Encoding values into the online environment

Just as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) had to adapt to the internationalization of its membership by adopting a code of conduct, there is an urgent need to find an equivalent set of norms to enable ‘civilized’ debate online and reduce extreme behaviour.

While technical solutions seem attractive, it is important to be aware of both the opportunities and risks of encoding social values into algorithms, or into machines themselves. This process will reach its zenith with autonomy, but machine learning biases are already apparent. How can there be a distributed system that is secure, when security itself is a value judgment?

Legitimacy in the multi-stakeholder process

Internet governance began as a technical project but ended up in the world of policy. The technical community has often been very open and transparent, whereas government decisions are often made under conditions of confidentiality. In this context, questions were asked as to how we get these two very different communities to work together and within the confines of traditional institutions; and who should be responsible for convening this consultative space.

A new status quo

Intelligence services used to assume that the status quo would remain of the Internet as a global commons. This view was challenged in 2010, in light of a raft of proposals for new international laws, protocols and technologies designed to benefit authoritarian states. Since then, engagement through the Internet Governance Forum has been stronger; but a liberal, multi-stakeholder perspective is not guaranteed, and will need to be fought for.

Multi-stakeholder policies

Internet policy has become divorced from public-sector spending rounds in many countries, for example in the UK. In this context, multi-stakeholder policy can be undertaken, but only if it does not have a financial impact. One participant noted that discussions on Internet governance and enhanced cooperation tend to go round in circles. In other countries, such as in Malaysia or Kenya, progress on multi-stakeholder models has been reversed when governments have changed or instability has increased. It is unclear who the convenor of the open, consultative space is.

One speaker asserted that while the multi-stakeholder model is liberal, it is not democratic, and there is a danger that in certain environments only the ‘right sort’ of stakeholders are wanted. One participant argued that there is little legitimate input by civil society, whose voice has been crowded out. Another disagreed, noting that those who exert most influence are people who have gone beyond the normal range of effort to extend their expertise.

There is therefore a complex ‘ecosystem’, and different types of decision-making are needed for different problems online. One participant noted that the Internet community has reinforced how the multi-stakeholder model can work. But the role of the public and of civil society is important in demanding systematic change in how governments make decisions that affect the Internet.

What are the solutions to current and foreseeable challenges?

As one speaker remarked, there is not a ‘grand, top-down plan that we will suddenly innovate. It will evolve organically in a very “Internet-y” way.’

Possible solutions

International norms for behaviour and security.

Several speakers highlighted the need for norms of online behaviour and security. This challenge should not be underestimated. The collapse of place is something new, and this challenges the ability to hold separate value systems in different places – something that has previously been essential for successful international diplomacy.

Technical solutions to make visible the silent majority

Technology cannot solve problems of human behaviour, but the problems cannot be solved without technology. The knee-jerk reaction has been to call for unwanted material to be blocked, but the minute this starts, filter bubbles are created. An alternative approach may be to adopt public broadcast values – whereby all views are presented and consumers are necessarily confronted with a range of viewpoints. One speaker suggested that technology could be harnessed to track who reads discussions.

Accountability for corporate impact on human rights

One solution may be to develop benchmarks for companies to make commitments; for others to be able to assess whether those are the right sort of commitments; and to provide data that will enable policymakers, civil society, companies and investors to have a conversation about what sort of Internet is collectively wanted.

Hate speech and fake news

Several speakers agreed that organizations like the Internet Society could help by starting to have essential conversations around fake news, hate speech and extremist content.

Security and the Internet of things

Regulators need to consider who holds IoT data, and focus on the cloud rather than attempting to regulate every object that comes onto the market.

Progress is possible, but the risks are real

One speaker noted that many of the problems that are hotly debated in the context of Internet policy have affected humanity for generations. These problems arise from success not failure. Traditional institutions such as the judiciary have shown themselves to be able to deal with many issues. Previous leaps forward in human connectivity have also led to unprecedented human destruction. Nevertheless, progress has been made, and ‘humanity has evolved’. In the long run, things are improving, and there are great possibilities for innovation, development and human growth.

The developing world is hopeful

Speakers from the developing world emphasized that for many developing countries the Internet continues to be seen overwhelmingly as a medium of opportunity and empowerment. Although countries in the developing world understand that the Internet can impose challenges on society, they still feel that the Internet is the only existing medium that can efficiently provide effective solutions to issues such as poverty, marginalization and education. Some participants also noted that the acceleration of technology could lead to a deepening of existing inequalities, but asserted that this risk could be overcome through truly inclusive and participatory processes.

[1]  When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.

The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the speaker(s) and participants, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event, every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions. The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. © The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2017.

Related Resources

The olympics and the internet: a timeline.

The way that we engage with the Olympic Games has changed significantly over time thanks to the Internet. We...

2024 East Africa Submarine Cable Outage Report

Discover the impact of the submarine cable cuts on local connectivity in East Africa and the importance of resilience...

Connectivity in the Middle East and North Africa

This report investigates the developments of broadband infrastructure and Internet connectivity in the Middle East and North Africa until...

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Stories From Experts About the Impact of Digital Life
• 1. The positives of digital life

Table of Contents

• 2. The negatives of digital life
• 3. Fifty-fifty anecdotes: How digital life has been both positive and negative
• About this canvassing of experts
• Acknowledgments

The greatest share of participants in this canvassing said their own experience and their observed experience among friends is that digital life improves many of the dimensions of their work, play and home lives. They cited broad changes for the better as the internet revolutionized everything, from the most pressing intellectual and emotional experiences to some of the most prosaic and everyday aspects of existence.

Louis Rossetto , self-proclaimed “troublemaker” and founder and former editor-in-chief of Wired magazine, summed it all up this way: “Digital technology is so broad today as to encompass almost everything. No product is made today, no person moves today, nothing is collected, analyzed or communicated without some ‘digital technology’ being an integral part of it. That, in itself, speaks to the overwhelming ‘value’ of digital technology. It is so useful that in short order it has become an integral part of all of our lives. That doesn’t happen because it makes our lives miserable.”

There is almost no area in which digital technology has not impacted me and my family’s life. Larry Irving

[artificial intelligence]

Mike Liebhold , senior researcher and distinguished fellow at the Institute for the Future, wrote, “Almost every member of my family regularly uses the internet to inform or improve aspects of their well-being: diet, fitness, health, social interaction with family and friends in person and online, education, entertainment, employment, commerce, finance and civic engagement.”

William Schrader , the founding CEO of PSINet, wrote, “Every single day: I have private communications with business associates in Europe, Asia, Latin America and in North America, and I receive emails or social media notices from my family members and their extended friends, and I receive the latest news and alerts from 20 different real news publications (such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and the Economist). All of this comes with little effort. And , after doing my local security, I can check every public investment I have made anywhere on earth and I can check my bank accounts and make transactions I deem of import, and I can search for any one or multiple piece of information that I need instantly, with or without Wi-Fi. Yes, I have what I wanted, everything at my fingertips. That means information, knowledge, history, ability to transact. I try to never do this when others are with me, since I love living in the moment. Since I am alone a lot, I can find the time. But I do not condemn or even slightly criticize people for taking a call, checking a text, reading, etc. What we built is what we wanted. It’s just that few people are happier. But, I am OK.”

Paul Saffo , a leading Silicon-Valley-based technological forecaster and consulting professor in the School of Engineering at Stanford University, said, “I have had an email address on my business card since 1982, and carry enough electronics on my person to get nervous in lightning storms. Digital connectivity has become like oxygen, utterly essential to my research. The net effect of these innovations has been to tie me more closely to other individuals and extend my interpersonal connections well beyond the pre-internet links of in-person interactions and telecommunications. I have friends – close friends who I have known for well over a decade and with whom I communicate nearly every day. We have never met in-person. In fact, we have never spoken over the phone. At the end of the day, the two of the three highest human desires are the desire to be useful, and the desire to share stories. We have been doing both since our distant ancestors sat around a savanna camp fire sharing their days and their dreams. Now, thanks to digital media, the circle around the campfire has grown to encompass (if we wish) all of humanity.”

Garland McCoy , president of the Technology Education Institute, said, “I can be a real-time engaged parent, husband, partner, problem solver, counselor, comforter, etc., while traveling anywhere in the world, and – if I am comfortable with a little inconvenience – I can usually manage this real-time interaction for free! Something that was never possible before. No more ‘Death of a Salesman.’”

Kyle Rose , principal architect at Akamai Technologies and active Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) participant, wrote, “There are simply too many things to list here. I’ll just hit on three. I can more easily keep in regular contact with friends in distant places. Those with whom I would have lost most contact (because, really, there’s no way I’m going to write letters or spend hours on the phone) I can now maintain a relationship with, sometimes of a fairly deep and interactive nature, via social media. This enables us to pick right up when we do finally see each other in person. Technology eases the difficulties of day-to-day life. Because of the internet, I have access to virtually all of recorded music at all times. I can get up-to-date maps and traffic data to avoid incidents. I can order food, groceries or a taxi, obtain up-to-date information about my flight status, and navigate foreign cities via public transit all from my phone with a few taps of my finger. Finally and relatedly, how the hell did I ever learn anything before the internet? The card catalog? Virtually all of human knowledge is at my fingertips at all times. It is rare that I ask a question of fact that someone hasn’t yet answered, and now many of those answers are available to anyone with access to a search engine. The impact of all of these is profoundly positive. And this is only a taste of what the internet, and technological advances in general, promise.”

Fred Davis , a futurist/consultant based in North America, wrote, “Messaging apps allow me to connect with people who have given me support, provided a chance to talk about life’s challenges, seek advice and many other things. Access to people is simplified. Chat apps (unlike Facebook) provide a one-on-one connection with another person, which can be more personal, human and healing than posting on social networks. I have been using a Fitbit for a number of years. I have had a heart attack and triple bypass and am pre-diabetic. Getting regular exercise is important, and my Fitbit helps me set and attain fitness goals much more easily than before. The ability to monitor and track my sleep helps me take actions to get better sleep, which definitely increases well-being. By connecting to my Fitbit scale I can also track my weight and tie it to my exercise goals. My Fitbit can connect to a Dexcom blood sugar-testing device that can test blood sugar every five minutes, which is extremely helpful in managing my pre-diabetes.”

These one-liners from anonymous respondents hit on a number of different positive themes:

• “I can get answers to questions about almost anything just by asking my telephone.”
• “I can save money on everything, including clothing and shoes, airfares, hotels and eat at better restaurants and drink better wine.”
• “Navigation via car has dramatically improved, with accurate up-to-date traffic information and destination wayfinding.”
• “Digital life is being able to speak and see someone – regardless of where you are – on a phone you carry on your person.”
• “Most people I have dated and approximately all of my friends knew me on the internet first; before such digital connectivity I would have just been lonely.”
• “Sharing photos of new generations instantly with loved ones on the other side of the world and using video and chat to send/receive money; to joke, to tease, to mourn.”
• “My son has grown up in a world in which he will never be lost; he will never be without a person to talk to; he will never be stopped from searching for an answer to a query.”
• “I work remotely for a company halfway around the world, and so does my partner. No need to be at a main office.”
• “The diffusion of webinars allows me to participate in many events organized in different countries without having to travel to them.”
• “Digital technology allows me to have better knowledge that empowers me to better support my own health when I face challenges.”
• “My job didn’t exist 15 years ago. I am a digital content manager.”
• “It means that we can participate in important moments that time and distance barred us from in the past.”
• “I feel more supported in good times and bad and laugh more than before I was connected online.”

Here is a roundup of the many ways these experts described the benefits they get and the benefits they observe.

Family enrichment and enhancement

Pamela Rutledge , director of the Media Psychology Research Center, said, “My 90-year-old father was on Facebook for the sole purpose of connecting with kids and grandkids who were scattered across the country. Reading and commenting on their posts gave him the ability to participate in the process of their lives. Knowing what the family members were doing increased his sense of involvement and the overall intimacy he experienced with them all. This familiarity also jump-started any family gathering, keeping people who were geographically disparate from feeling like relative strangers and allowing relationships to be more immediately meaningful. Texting in all forms serves the same purpose. Closeness in relationships is achieved by the frequency of contact. The human brain reacts to virtual contact as if it were real, releasing the same neurotransmitters of positive emotion and reward as if people were face to face. Texting allows for the multiple touchpoints, the sharing of life’s process and the reassurance of connection. These experiences replicate the behaviors that developmental psychologist Mary Ainsworth described in her ground-breaking work on attachment theory and how people form a secure attachment style, essential to emotional well-being.”

The simplest anecdote is about keeping a family messaging chat open with my wife and children. Stowe Boyd

Stowe Boyd , managing director at Work Futures, said, “The simplest anecdote is about keeping a family messaging chat open with my wife and children. My kids – both in their 20s – live in Brooklyn, which is close to where we live, but over an hour away. However, we all participate in the chat, often several times in a day. We share pictures, links, stories, plans. It is simply much lower friction than how I managed to remain in contact – or didn’t, really – with my parents when I was in my 20s. Then it was an occasional phone call, visits when possible, but it was pretty tenuous. And I had what most of my contacts considered an unusually close and caring relationship with my folks. I wouldn’t say my family today is hyperconnected , but we certainly remain very connected, where scarcely a day passes without some interaction between all of us despite the physical distance involved. And this has allowed an extra richness to my life, and I guess theirs, a counter to the possible distance that could otherwise grow in our relations because of the hour of travel that separates us.”

[difference of digital life]

Steve Stroh , technology journalist, said, “Two observations. The first is that one of the regrets of my life is that I didn’t work hard enough to stay in touch with all of my family and friends as I moved away from my hometown and got involved in my career. Thus, many of my family and friends that were once dear to me are now estranged – entirely my fault. In my daughter’s generation (born in the 1990s), with social media like Facebook, etc., my daughter’s generation and beyond, they will never get entirely out of touch with family and friends (unless they really want to). They’ll know about significant events in their friends’ and family’s lives as things happen, and can always reach out because there’s a consistent point of contact – the social media messaging, ‘stable’ phone numbers such as mobile, email, etc. The second is that my wife and I maintain a near-daily ‘running conversation’ with my daughter who’s moved away via three-way ‘text’ messaging. We often share photos (of the family pets, as it turns out) and let each other know about important or unimportant – perhaps funny – things that are going on in our lives. So the three of us are never really out of touch, which is a wonderful, wonderful thing. I wish I could do this with MY father (who is, alas, very technophobic).”

Richard Sambrook , professor of journalism at Cardiff University in the United Kingdom, wrote, “Very simply, I can talk to and see my daughter on the other side of the world at low or zero cost via video/smartphone technology in a way that was unthinkable a decade or more ago. It helps hold families together.”

Perry Hewitt , vice president of marketing and digital strategy at ITHAKA, said, “We live in an aging society; in the developed world, the population is getting older, people are living longer, and fertility rates are falling. Here in the U.S., where families can be geographically dispersed and family-leave policies minimal, caring for older relatives is difficult. Our family has benefitted from the many technology advances in elder care from cameras to robots to medication reminders to video calling. There is so much available to track critical metrics and improve quality of life – for the elderly and their tapped-out caregivers. I believe we’re still in the infancy of technologies that can improve medical compliance and personal safety, and combat a scourge many older Americans face: loneliness.”

Mary Chayko , a professor at the Rutgers University’s School of Communication and Information, wrote, “My family and I now stay in contact via an unending series of group texts. While we would have remained connected via letters or phone calls in a pre-digital time, this allows the simpler, more convenient and more frequent sharing of moments both incidental and more meaningful, and keeps us consistently in one another’s minds and hearts.”

Alex Halavais , director of the M.A. in social technologies at Arizona State University, said, “We have two children in elementary school. It starts at the same time each day and ends at the same time. The children are generally out of touch with the family during this period. This would not have been unusual when I was in elementary school or when my parents were in elementary school, but the other institutions in our lives have changed this. We have shared family calendars that show who needs to be where and when, but these change with some consistency. While my partner and I both have busy careers, they never fall within clearly defined work hours, and mobile technologies mean that our everyday social and business lives are weaved together rather than blocked in clear periods. Time has changed, except for the kids’ grade school. It remains anchored in one position: the 20th century.”

Eelco Herder , an assistant professor of computer science whose focus is on personalization and privacy at  Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen in the Netherlands, wrote, “My husband and I live relatively far away (about two to five hours) from our families and our friends live in several countries. Facebook makes it easier to stay in touch with them, to inform them about important events, to show pictures of our daily lives, and – in return – to be informed about things that matter to them. For me, my circle of online friends has evolved from mainly ‘online contacts’ in the mid-2000s to people whom I know in daily life. As a result, if we meet friends after a year or so without contact, we do not need to give an overview of last year, but just continue the conversation and play a board game. It is also easier now to stay in touch with a larger number of people than in earlier days. Apps like WhatsApp allow us to have daily contact with our families, simply by exchanging short messages or sending quick pictures. This interaction does not replace phone calls and visits, but complements them.”

Nathaniel Borenstein , chief scientist at Mimecast, said, “In the 1980s and early 90s, people asked me why I cared so much about advancing the capacities of email. My usual reply: ‘Some day I will have grandchildren, and I want to get pictures of them right away, by email.’ This dream came true when I received an email that contained a sonogram image of my twin granddaughters when they were each no bigger than a few cells. I had expected those first pictures to be considerably cuter. Even though I was an evangelist for the future of communication technology, that technology exceeded my wildest imaginings.”

Srinivasan Ramani , a retired research scientist and professor, said, “It was in 1993. My daughter left school in Bombay and moved to college in the U.S. Telecommunication in India was quite bad in those days. The number of telephones, both landline and cellular, was about 3 million. (Compare with the billion or so cellphones we have in the same country now!) I knew it would be difficult for my daughter to call us back soon after arrival at the college, and so had asked her to get access to internet on campus and contact us through email and chat. She did that within hours of arrival. My wife had, to that point, carefully stayed away from the dial-up terminal I had on my study table at home for years. Now, she suddenly demanded to be introduced to the system. She demonstrated that given the right motivation, people can learn to use a dial-up terminal for email and internet chat in two days at the most! Our daughter was, for the next four years, our daughter on the Net!”

Claudia L’Amoreaux , digital consultant, wrote, “I started using videoconferencing early. First I used a black-and-white video phone that sent a still image every 5 seconds or so. Friends and I got our hands on one and did some fun experiments with artist techies at the Electronic Cafe in Los Angeles. Later I used Cornell’s CU-SeeMe videoconferencing. A real turning point for me was using the high-end PictureTel videoconferencing system in the early ‘90s. When the PictureTel staff dialed up and connected me to a person in New York City (I was in Monterey, California), as I said hello, tears came involuntarily to my eyes; the intimacy was so unexpected, I was overwhelmed with this encounter with a stranger. Fast forward to five years ago. My 85-year-old mother had a recurrence of cancer. We lived many miles apart. On one of my visits, we went to the phone store and I helped her pick out her first iPhone. It was so awesome to watch her learn to text with her friends. I could FaceTime her from my home while I got my life in order so I could return to take care of her. That phone was a literal lifeline during her last months – a source of joy, a tool for coordinating her care, and a reassurance for me that I could actually see daily how she was doing. I think of all the technology in our lives, videoconferencing technology contributes in a profound way to my well-being, bringing me closer to dear family and friends who live at a distance, or even just across the bay like my daughter does. I love it when we both have time to just hang out together via FaceTime when we can’t be there in person.”

Kirsten Brodbeck-Kenney , a director, said, “Thanks to social media and video chatting, my parents have been able to be very involved in my child’s life in spite of living on the other side of the country. She is only two and a half, but she knows their faces and voices and feels connected to them, even though she’s only met them a handful of times.”

Work creator, enabler and enhancer

I spend a great deal of my day online, and being hyperconnected makes it possible to find all the things I need to have a decent quality of life. Dewayne Hendricks

Dewayne Hendricks , CEO of Tetherless Access, said, “Living a digital life has made it possible to be self-sustaining financially. I spend a great deal of my day online, and being hyperconnected makes it possible to find all the things I need to have a decent quality of life. The type of life I’m leading now would not have been possible 30 years ago. I take comfort in the fact that I’ve had a hand in shaping a part of this thriving digital Web.”

Michael Rogers , a futurist based in North America, said, “I now live half the year in the Sicilian farm country where, thanks to wireless internet access, I can do most of my work. Ten years ago that would have been quite impossible. One of the things I most like about Sicily (besides the obvious attractions) is that while there is plenty of Facebook and email and Twitter, the ‘digital lifestyle’ has not colored private and public life so much as it has in my other home, New York City. Sicily remains a far more face-to-face culture. Why that is the case and how long it will continue is a longer story, but it is ironic that I’m using the new digital tools to avoid the side effects of those same tools.”

[Transmission Control Protocol]

James Blodgett , an advisory board member with the Lifeboat Foundation, wrote, “Important work is shared. When several string theorists published several papers predicting black hole production at particle colliders, I became involved with the collider controversy. The original safety considerations had glaring holes. … I made contacts with safety experts and scientists who were also concerned. I started a Global Risk Reduction special interest group in Mensa, I became an advisory board member of the Lifeboat Foundation (one of thousands), and I participated in writing petitions and contacting people. … The main thing we accomplished was to get CERN, the organization sponsoring the then-upcoming Large Hadron Collider, to do a second safety study.”

[Internet Relay Chat]

Jordan LaBouff , associate professor of psychology at the University of Maine, commented, “There are so many ways, from allowing me to stay connected to my family and other relationships while I travel for work and research, to being able to translate or navigate on the fly in difficult cross-cultural situations. The one that springs to mind is actually my wife’s work experience. Two years ago, due in part to the challenges of living with multiple chronic health conditions, my wife left her successful job as a cell technologist at a local hospital to pursue digital journalism. It has allowed her to work from home and write for a large public audience about research surrounding bipolar disorder. This digital environment provides her employment, and her writing supports thousands of people every week who read her research (that she accesses digitally) and writing and who get social support and well-being tips from it. It’s a remarkable way the digital world has improved our physical one.”

Tom Wolzien , chairman at The Video Call Center LLC, said, “My family’s creation of The Video Call Center to produce broadcast-quality television from the 4 billion global smartphones (and related patents and other intellectual property to make it reliable and cost effective) has enabled a flattening of traditional live video access, enabling programs based on zero-cost live remotes from about anywhere on the planet without field origination, transport, or control room costs. This means that any media organization can put about anyone on the air from anywhere, restricted only by the depth of the producer’s contact list.”

Jane Elizabeth , director of the accountability journalism program at the American Press Institute, wrote, “Digital technology has allowed my small non-profit organization to work efficiently and effectively from wherever we are in the world. For non-profits and even small for-profit organizations, you just can’t overstate the positive benefits of this type of mobility. There are absolute cost savings in overhead, travel, hourly wages. And there are qualitative benefits in employee work-life balance, productivity and emotional health.”

Jeremiah Foster , an open-source technologist at the GENIVI Alliance, said, “I lived and worked in Sweden for about 15 years. Recently I moved back to the United States to be with family since I’m originally from the U.S. I’m able to keep my employment, including my salary, my title and my day-to-day work while living thousands of miles away from the company I work for.”

Eugene Daniel , a young professional based in the United States, said, “Digital technology impacts every aspect of my daily life. As a member of the media, my job depends on technology (telecommunications, social media, internet). As a person who lives apart from family and loved ones, I depend on digital communication to stay in touch – including frequently connecting on FaceTime with my girlfriend. The uses are endless.”

Devin Fidler , a futurist and consultant based in the U.S., commented, “Sites like Upwork have allowed Rethinkery Labs to routinely pull together ‘flash teams’ of colleagues, support and expert advisers in a way that accomplishes many tasks more efficiently than would have been humanly possible before coordination platforms.”

Frank Feather , a business futurist and strategist with a focus on digital transformation, commented, “Technology allowed me to quit commuting – which is asinine in this era – to quit my career job, and to become a full-time consultant, thus allowing me to help far more organizations on a freelance-anywhere basis. This has been most fulfilling. Similarly, my children have built worldwide networks of friends and fellow students. We have two adopted daughters, and the internet has allowed one of them to find and connect with her birth family in China. None of this would be possible without the internet. The internet unifies people and combines ideas very easily.”

Yoram Kalman , an associate professor at the Open University of Israel, wrote, “Digital technology freed me from having to spend all of my work hours in the office. I have been telecommuting and working from home at least part of the week since the late ‘90s. That would not have been possible without the advent of digital communication. It allowed me to better integrate work, family commitments, leisure, health challenges of self, of children and of elderly parents, social commitments, etc. Consequently, my work is more productive. Furthermore, the ability to work across geographical and national borders opened new opportunities that made my work more exciting and fulfilling. Throughout this time, I had to learn and relearn how to use communication technologies in ways that empower me, and how to minimize the harm they cause. It is an ongoing learning challenge.”

Charlie Firestone , executive director of the Aspen Institute’s communications and society program, said, “I run an office of seven people. I was able to move from Washington, D.C., to California with little detriment, mostly due to video-conferencing. In our case it is Skype for Business that puts each employee a touch of a button away, and the video changes the interaction from simply voice calls or email. I see video calls, a la FaceTime or Skype to be a common activity of the future in business.”

[Structured Query Language]

Adam Montville , a vice president at the Center for Internet Security, said, “I have the privilege of working from home each and every day. While there are some aspects of office life I miss, the truth is that technology has made this possible. For our family, this has been immeasurably valuable. I can work more productively at different times of day, all while maintaining healthy boundaries for work/life balance (which really isn’t about hard boundaries as much as it is about unobtrusively blending the two). Before such technology existed, I had to commute. I had to be tied down to a specific schedule each and every day. I couldn’t connect to colleagues from a mountainside or a sailboat. It just wasn’t possible.”

Ann Adams , a technical writer based in North America, said, “It gave me a profession; one that did not exist when I was growing up.”

Vincent Alcazar , director at Vincent Alcazar LLC, wrote, “The growing mobility of labor cannot be underestimated, and the primary enabler is the gig economy with the internet as its engine. The gig economy only grows from here, as does its entwinement within people’s lives.”

Health and wellness aid

Avery Holton , an associate professor of communication at The University of Utah, commented, “As someone who has twice experienced the impact of cancer, once at the beginning of digital and social media and once in 2016, I feel more empowered by the ability to be transparent and accepted. Yes, we all still enjoy sharing those moments in our lives that give off the best appearance, but the stigma of sharing experiences of disease or pain or loss has lessened. More and more, we are encouraged by the actions or the postings of others to share our tougher experiences and to, if we so wish, build a community around those experiences. The first time I went through cancer, I felt lost and disconnected and without voice. This time, though it admittedly took some coaxing from friends and other supporters, I shared my experience and my recovery. That really helped me through the process and into a quicker, more lasting mental, emotional and physical recovery.”

My online network and digital tools made it easy to share the event, his progress, my stress and feelings, for others to empathize and share resources and advice. Susan Price

Susan Price , lead experience strategist at the United Services Automobile Association (USAA), commented, “My husband had a stroke last year. My online network and digital tools made it easy to share the event, his progress, my stress and feelings, for others to empathize and share resources and advice. I found myself carefully segregating my communications by channel, moderating the degree of honesty according to the size and makeup of the group. I report to the largest group in Facebook ‘sanitized’ updates of mostly hopeful progress reports and vignettes that show me or my husband in a flattering or inspirational light. I avoid upsetting others with starkly honest or too-revealing stories of my own or my husband’s pain, frustration or lack of coping. My husband is aware of my propensity to share, and has asked directly when we’re discussing a fraught situation, ‘This isn’t going on Facebook, is it? Good!’ But he suggested my posting and sharing some achievements. Because of its ubiquity and reach, Facebook helped me identify select others in my network – many of whom I hadn’t spoken with in 10 to 20 years – who had directly relevant experience with caregiving of stroke survivors and adjusting when a partner suffers a severe health crisis. With those found veterans, I moved the discussion to more private channels such as Facebook Messenger, email or phone to share more honestly my negative feelings, fears and pain, and received directly helpful specific advice, support and resources. I’ve also used caregiver forums to connect with quickly available communities of peers in situations much closer to my own.”

Gina Neff , an associate professor and senior research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, said, “Digital technology has been a godsend for care-givers, allowing people to coordinate their efforts to help during cancer treatment, when a newborn arrives, or during a health crisis. Apps and websites cannot replace the communities that have always connected and supported us, but they can help diverse and dispersed groups coordinate care in unprecedented ways.”

Bradford Hesse , chief of health communication and informatics research at the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), said, “I now stay in closer contact with my healthcare provider than I ever have before. If I have a question, I can ask it through secure messaging. If I want to evaluate my own recent blood panels for areas of concern or progress, I can do that online through a secure portal. Robocalls to my house from my provider as well as text messages to my phone ensure that I do not miss a recommended cancer screening. I watch my diet more rigorously with the help of a diet app on my smartphone equipped with camera to retrieve caloric/nutritional information, and I monitor my exercise goals through the use of my Apple Watch wearable. If I have a complaint, it is usually because the ecosystem of medicine is still not connected enough. There are laggards who resist sharing my electronic health record data with specialists as needed. There is 20th-century thinking that prevents these digital technologies from being fully integrated into the medical system in ways that will be cost-efficient, interoperable, empowering and truly usable.”

Thomas Lenzo , a respondent who shared no additional identifying details, commented, “Digital technology has facilitated my management of various aspects of my healthcare. I am able to schedule appointments and order prescription refills online, at any time of day. I can get detailed text or video information about health issues from trusted sources. I have access via portals to my health records. I also tell family and friends how they can use digital technology to impact their health.”

Ed Black , president and CEO of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, said, “The ability to monitor the medical records, procedures, medicines of a loved one remotely provides opportunity for quality oversight and rapid response, in contrast to being tied to hospital visits and uncertainty.”

Gary L. Kreps , distinguished professor and director of the Center for Health and Risk Communication at George Mason University, wrote, “My family and I use wearable fitness trackers that tally our daily exercise behaviors (steps). This has influenced both our awareness of our physical activity and motivation to exercise regularly. We strive to accomplish our 10,000 daily steps! We also compare our exercise levels and encourage each other to engage in physical activity. We now seek opportunities to exercise together to achieve our activity goals. This has improved our overall physical activity, fitness and health.”

Kevin J. Payne , founder of Chronic Cow LLC, said, “Since I research the effects of chronic illness and live with multiple sclerosis, I have a particular interest in using these technologies to monitor and evaluate my condition, keep up on the latest research, and connect with others – both professionals and others living with chronic conditions. My life has been radically affected by these burgeoning technologies on all these fronts. It allows me to collect my own data, blend it with other datasets and generate and test real-time predictive algorithms. I have a far better understanding of my condition, especially as it is baselined against relevant populations. I not only get access to cutting edge pre-print research, but I’ve also been able to widen my professional network by communicating with the researchers. And my involvement with patient communities has enriched my life in many ways.”

David Myers , a professor of psychology at Hope College, wrote, “As a person with hearing loss and an advocate for a hearing-assistive technology that has great promise (www.hearingloop.org), the internet has networked me with kindred spirit advocates nationwide (also via 19,898 emails I have sent and 18,516 received with the words ‘hearing’ and ‘loop’). Together, our internet-facilitated ‘hearing loop’ advocacy has led to thousands of newly equipped facilities, from home TV rooms to worship places to auditoriums to airports (and New York City subway booths and new taxis). And more progress is on the horizon. Supported by digital technology, we are making a better world for people with hearing loss.”

[doctor in general practice]

Doug Breitbart , co-founder and co-director of The Values Foundation, said, “In my life I have experienced significant adverse changes and circumstance, living situation and health. Virtual connectivity via the internet has enabled me to establish networks of connections, collaborative communities and new friendships and relationships with people around the world.”

Leah Robin , a health scientist based in North America, said, “My family has a genetic form of anemia that is very rare. Because of digital technology we’ve been able to make contact with researchers, take advantage of on-going research, and provide and receive support from other patients from around the world. The impact has been, at times, lifesaving for my family members.”

Christopher Bull , a university librarian, said, “I had an itchy rash on my hands. Found articles on the internet which suggested using witch hazel. No rash, no itch.”

Community lifeline

Ethan Zuckerman , director of the Center for Civic Media at MIT, wrote, “I went through a divorce recently and wrote about my experiences online. While there are few folks in my immediate community who are going through divorce, I found several friends in other cities in my extended circles who had excellent support and advice. One of the most supportive individuals was an acquaintance from college who was not a close friend, but who stepped up on Facebook and was a wonderful support to me from halfway around the country.”

Together, we grow intelligence, connect up one another’s work and support positive social change just by doing our work, following one another and sharing what’s meaningful more widely. Anne Collier

Anne Collier , consultant and executive at The Net Safety Collaborative, said, “I ‘talk’ with people all over the world on a daily basis on Twitter – seeing, learning from, supporting and spreading what’s meaningful to them in their work and lives. It’s a tremendous source of inspiration for me. Together, we grow intelligence, connect up one another’s work and support positive social change just by doing our work, following one another and sharing what’s meaningful more widely.”

Kathryn Campbell , a digital experience design consultant, said, “I have a young friend who lives in another state in a rural area. Over time, I have realized from their social media posts that he/she is emerging as gender non-conforming (probably transsexual). In the past, this is a journey that I would probably not have known about, especially since his/her immediate family is very conservative and have not accepted this facet of the young person’s identity. I am so grateful to have been included in this revelation so I can offer my unconditional love and support. And I am even more grateful that a person who in the past would have felt isolated, unnatural, and broken now knows that they are in fact part of a global community. He/she can find and utilize peer support groups as well as myriad medical, psychological and spiritual resources that would not have been available to someone in a small town in the past. I believe this will probably save lives. I definitely hope that it will help increase our ability as a society to accept others who don’t conform to our preconceived notions of what is normal.”

Ana Cristina Amoroso das Neves , director of the department for the information society at Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, said, “The smartphone has become a part of my family life. The current organisation we have and the data we can share more than modified the way we interact. There is no waste of time and therefore we all gain efficiency in our daily life. The dawn of Internet of Things is already embedded. … If there is an electricity glitch, we cannot even think how will we survive due to the new paradigm we have in our lives. Hyperconnection is part of my family and friends’ well-being. It is nothing that can be compared with the life my parents had. I wonder how I could have survived in that society, living before total digital connectivity existed, even when it had just started and was not spread yet.”

Deborah Lupton , a professor at University of Canberra’s News & Media Research Centre, said, “I live in a vast continent (Australia) where academics are scattered many kilometres from each other, and it is a very long, expensive and exhausting plane ride from my colleagues in the Northern Hemisphere. However, I have extensive networks with my colleagues on Twitter and Facebook. I enjoy taking time out to chat with them, sharing professional and also some personal information regularly. It makes me feel less isolated and more easily able to keep in contact with my academic network. Nothing beats face-to-face encounters, but social media and emails, as well as the occasional use of Skype, is a far better way to maintain these contacts than letter writing or faxing, which is how we did things before digital media.”

Nancy Heltman , visitor services director for Virginia State Parks, said, “I have met and developed relationships with people outside any sphere of reference I never would have had thanks to my digital life. This started when I worked on the 2008 Obama campaign, includes people I met through a group where we shared our love for household pets and goes through today where I have a relationship with customers that I never would have met personally. While I do not believe that my online relationships replace ones that involve personal face-to-face connections, they are important and have broadened my horizons in many ways, adding a richness to my life. In fact my more-traditional face-to-face relationships have also benefited from more communication due to digital communications. When forced to only have relationships with people you can meet in person, you tend to live in a more-narrow world, with people more like you. Digital communications broadens your horizons, or it can if you want it to.”

Social media: The horizon expander

Michael R. Nelson , public policy expert with Cloudflare, said, “I’m an avid user of social media, which I use to track developments in internet policy around the world. Almost every day, one of the people I follow on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn shares a report, law review article, economic analysis, or news article on something I need to know about and would not have discovered by just reading the U.S. newspapers and media sites I track regularly. Equally importantly, my Facebook and LinkedIn friends introduce me to experts in the field in countries around the world – without my having to spend time flying overseas to attend conferences. In 2017, I was able to be a fun participant in the Global Conference in Cyber Space in New Delhi without missing Thanksgiving with my family. Likewise, I was able to be a remote participant at the UN’s Internet Governance Forum in Geneva without leaving my house (as long as I was willing to tune into the webcast at 4 a.m.).”

[bulletin board system]

Michael Roberts , an internet pioneer and Internet Hall of Fame member, commented “Despite its well-known problems, I find that Facebook is important to me in a number of ways. 1) Keeping up with professional friends around the globe now that I am retired. For an old fart (81), it is a source of daily intellectual stimulation and a feeling of keeping my hand in the game. 2) A window into many marvelous places and activities. I am a railfan and there are restored steam engines, abandoned trackage, lonely and empty depots, etc., to fill any amount of time I have available. Name your hobby or sport, and there are folks out there to share their discoveries with you. 3) The original ‘family and friends’ angle. My siblings and I are all over the U.S. Facebook lets us pretend we are close (Worldwide webcams add a lot as well). There are lots of other examples – politics, medicine, personal safety, education.”

Jerry Michalski , founder of the Relationship Economy eXpedition, said, “I now have peripheral vision into the lives of family, friends and acquaintances a few degrees from me – all voluntarily. When I see them, I don’t need to ask ‘what’s up,’ but can say ‘I’m glad your daughter got through her operation,’ or whatever is appropriate for the state of their lives I can observe. Those weak ties are priceless, and lead to insights. In the early days of Twitter, I left a meeting and tweeted something like, ‘Just left a mtg about the cash health care economy. Had no idea it existed or was big.’ At the time, I had set up for all my tweets to forward to Facebook, and the next day I got a fascinating eight-paragraph note on Facebook from an acquaintance who had taken his family off regular health insurance years ago, and was very happy with the outcomes. On the other hand, I am among the Satanic Device Addicts who check email on their phones first thing in the morning (it’s on the night table, right?) and tap and prod them all day long, in search of those little dopamine hits.”

… All of us now have the ability to find ‘our people’ – those who share our interests and passions and concerns – in ways that we couldn’t when our connective avenues were limited by time and geography. Scott McLeod

[live-action roleplaying gamer]

Jason Hong , professor at the Human Computer Interaction Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, wrote, “WeChat is not well known in the U.S., but is perhaps the most popular app in China. It’s primarily a messaging app, like Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp, but also serves as a social network and message board. What’s really amazing is how it’s really helped my family (from China) connect with others here in the U.S. My father-in-law found people to go fishing with. My mother-in-law found a monthly foodies group to go to. My wife found some of her old high school classmates, plus a group of people that buy foods in bulk at discount and split the costs. As for me, well, I’m the boring one, I just use it to send text messages and emoji to my wife. For my family, WeChat works well because it lowers the transaction costs of finding individuals with similar interests and backgrounds. My parents-in-law don’t speak much English, so WeChat acts as a major filter for people who do speak Chinese. WeChat also lets you organize message boards by geography, making it easy to find groups that are geographically nearby. It’s pretty amazing, since these weren’t really problems that we knew we had, and the WeChat groups just filled those needs quite nicely. Furthermore, it was a good tool that let us first find people virtually and then transition to real-world relationships.”

Richard Bennett , a creator of the Wifi MAC protocol and modern Ethernet, commented, “Facebook was useful for spreading the word to my extended family about the status of two relatives who died of pancreatic cancer recently. In one case, a sister-in-law in another country used me as a go-between to reach my wife, and in another I used it to contact a former stepbrother, a sister and a half brother. As modern families become more complex, communication tools have had to adapt.”

Lisa Nielsen , director of digital learning at the New York City Department of Education, said, “I am the administrator of several Facebook groups around areas of personal interest such as hobbies, sports, career (education). I started a Facebook group for teachers at the New York City Department of Education who love teaching with technology. In the past all these people existed in the 1,800 schools across the city, but there was no way for these people to find one another. The group now has close to 3,000 members. It is highly active, and strong relationships are being built. We have a direct line to what is happening in schools. Teachers feel supported like never before. They are more confident and better able to serve their students. They have increased job satisfaction. They share extreme gratitude for the group and its responsiveness. They are no longer alone but rather supported by a powerful network of other dedicated teachers.”

Knowledge storehouse

[massive open online courses]

Jeff Jarvis , a professor at City University of New York’s Graduate School of Journalism, said, “I count as an unfathomable luxury the ability to look up most any fact, any book, any news article at no cost and in seconds. I value the friends I have made from a tremendous diversity of background and worldviews thanks to the connected Net. I welcome many – though certainly not all – new voices I can hear now thanks to the Net putting a printing press in anyone’s hands. And not incidentally, I have transformed my career thanks to the lessons I continually learn by and about the Net.”

Deborah Hensler , professor of law at Stanford University, wrote, “On a personal level, digital technology enables me to work more productively from any place in the world. It provides access to a vast store of information and research data. It has enabled me to collaborate with academic colleagues in many different parts of the world, which has been an incredibly generative experience. In my personal life, it connects me to far-flung family and friends. It also connects me to people who share my political views, which gives me some hope – perhaps foolish – that working with them I can shift the political discourse.”

Ray Schroeder , associate vice chancellor for online learning at the University of Illinois Springfield, wrote, “I have been engaged in teaching, researching and presenting/publishing in advocating educational technology in higher education over the past 46 years. As I think back over those nearly five decades, my impact and reach today is far greater than I had ever imagined in 1971 or ‘81 or even 2001. Through the use of social media, I am able to share resources and perspectives to tens of thousands of others in my field on a daily basis. The prospect that one person could manage that scope of impact and reach was inconceivable for anyone who was not a network commentator on television or a nationally syndicated columnist. Now this opportunity extends to all who are dedicated to a purpose or cause.”

Larry MacDonald , CEO of Edison Innovations, wrote, “Sharing enables power to flow to those who ‘know’ rather than only those who control. People have a better grasp of news and tools that can make their lives easier. Knowledge disseminates faster and deeper.”

Problem solver and wonder creator

Hal Varian , chief economist at Google, commented, “I was in Rio trying to communicate with a taxi driver a few months before the Olympics. The driver pulled out his phone and clicked on Google Translate. Problem solved. Turns out that Google had trained all the taxi drivers in Rio how to use this fantastic tool.”

In terms of the spread of knowledge, the past two decades have been as revolutionary as when early man harnessed fire. Kenneth Cukier

Kenneth Cukier , senior editor at The Economist, wrote, “In researching my new book on AI, I came across a citation of a relevant document from the 1950s by the East German secret police, the Stasi. I Googled it and got a digital copy – which, when you think about it, is amazing. But my German is lousy. So I uploaded the 35-page report into Google Translate and got an English version a minute later – which is even more astounding. Just 20 years ago it was impossible for all but the most prestigious scholar to obtain something like that, and it might take half a year. I did it on impulse in four minutes. In terms of the spread of knowledge, the past two decades have been as revolutionary as when early man harnessed fire.”

Vint Cerf , Internet Hall of Fame member and vice president and chief internet evangelist at Google, commented, “I moved my wife from an older iPhone with AT&T service to a Google Pixel 2 with Google Fi service. It took 10 minutes and did NOT require physical modification or even installation of a SIM card. I got confirmation from AT&T within minutes that the account and phone number had been transferred. I was astonished.”

[Internet Governance Forum]

Bart Knijnenburg , assistant professor at Clemson University, said, “Seven years ago, when I got my first iPhone with FaceTime, I was calling my fiancée (who was living on the other side of the country) on my bike ride home from work. Out of nowhere a number of hot air balloons appeared, and with the touch of a button I was able to switch to a video call. I remember being amazed by the simplicity with which I was able to share this experience. Nowadays, communicating with people anywhere in the world has become second nature to me. Sometimes I realize that I have written several research papers with people whom I have never met in person!”

Heywood Sloane , partner and co-founder of HealthStyles.net, said, “The criterion I used for my most recent purchase of a smartwatch was that it NOT try to be a watch. I have one already, a gift from my wife that I am very fond of, thank you! I expected, and got, a multitude of tools to help me stay on track with stress, sleep, biometrics and much more. What I did not expect, was the way it tamed the peppering of email, notifications by apps, ringtones and alarms of people and things clamoring for my immediate attention. It reduces them all to gentle vibrations. Long ones for calls I wanted to take, and short ones for everything else. It lets me block interruptions from apps and emailers. It also let me see others and get more detail with a tap when I want it. It gives me control and helps me defend my space to concentrate and focus on what I choose, rather than what someone else chooses.”

Thomas Viall , president of Rhode Island Interactive, commented, “Just this past Christmas shopping season is a great example of how digital technology was beneficial. We could text our relatives rather than interrupt them with a call. They were able to share their wish list, we could comparison shop online (at both local and national stores), find the best value, search for coupons and either order online or use navigation to find the best route to the store despite holiday traffic.”

Education tool

Olugbenga Adesida , founder and CEO of Bonako, based in Africa, wrote, “The digital revolution has changed social relationships and the way we communicate. In some African countries like Kenya and Zimbabwe, mobile payment transactions are responsible for over 40% of GDP. Mobile apps are used to deliver education as well as providing timely information to farmers to enhance their productivity. Similarly, mobile apps are used to deliver price and other market information. At our firm – Bonako a mobile games and app-development company – it is our platform for continuous education for staff; it is what we use to access training materials from all over the world. We also use digital tools to plan and develop our products in a way that would not have been possible only a few years ago. Developing games and apps requires varied expertise, and collaboration is key. The new tools for collaborative work allow us to work together and to provide virtual access to potential partners/clients to test products no matter where they are in the world.”

Karl M. van Meter , founding director of the bilingual scientific quarterly Bulletin of Sociological Methodology, said, “Far from being a ‘brief personal anecdote,’ what has changed greatly in my life and work, like that of almost everyone in higher education and research, is that the internet and associated technologies mean that no longer only a few top persons have access to the necessary information, technology and means for scientific production and teaching. It is no longer only the director (always a male) who gets his secretary (always a female) to type out his paper and check references before having it published. Almost all competent teachers and researchers have that possibility now; moreover they can work together over great distances and form social structures among themselves, independent of centralized or local administrative control. A ‘brief personal anecdote’ along these lines would be when a national director of scientific research here in France asked to be appointed to an international body associated with UNESCO. That body replied very respectfully to the director that they had already found a better candidate from France who had been working with them via the internet. That other candidate was me.”

Today, students I help mentor through their own doctoral studies have access to all of the material I did two decades ago, but with a fraction of the time and travel commitment. Greg Downey

Greg Downey , a professor and associate dean at University of Wisconsin, Madison, said, “When I was a graduate student at a U.S. private research university in the late 1990s, I spent many hours gathering background context for the beginning of a major historical and social research project, tracking down physical newspaper indexes, footnote references, printed journal volumes and microfilm reels from dozens of access-restricted research libraries. Weeks and months of ‘metadata labor’ on a particular idea might lead to a viable research project and a source of accessible primary research materials – or to a dead end and a need to start all over. I recall being among the first users of some of the online image databases produced by the federal government to find visual evidence that I simply wouldn’t have had the ability to access (or even know it existed) even five years earlier. Similarly, once materials were acquired and assembled, only rudimentary organization and writing tools were available for assembling the project into a coherent narrative. I recall being one of the first individuals at my university to use Geographic Information Systems software in my historical analysis and in the production of my final manuscript. All of the temporal and spatial expectations of earning a Ph.D. in the humanities and interpretive social sciences were tied to expectations of analog, print and physically housed resources. Today, students I help mentor through their own doctoral studies have access to all of the material I did two decades ago, but with a fraction of the time and travel commitment. This has raised the expectations for comprehensiveness in literature reviews and archival searches; it has raised the expectations for presentation of data and engagement of narrative. It is both easier and harder to do great work now and get that Ph.D. within the same five-year time period. But I think the work that is done is of higher quality, and the scholars that are produced are of greater intellectual prowess and scope than ever before.”

Adriana Labardini Inzunza , commissioner of Mexico’s Federal Institute of Telecommunications, said, “There are so many stories of how IT and internet have made my work more productive and my access to relevant information far easier – hopefully for others around me as well. As a commissioner at the Federal Institute of Telecommunications I made sure that our virtual board meetings and deliberations were valid; on many occasions I have been able to deliberate and vote on the cases submitted to the board through a video conference when in business travels and I also to hold e-meetings with my staff. My office has home-office on Mondays, saving hours of wasted time on traffic jams. …

[National Autonomous University of Mexico]

Jacob Dankasa , a North American researcher, said, “Technology has connected me to achieve today what I couldn’t imagine in the past. When I was doing my doctoral dissertation, I was supposed to travel to Nigeria from the U.S. to conduct interviews with my research participants. Unfortunately, the Ebola epidemic blew up in Africa and I was unable to go. Fortunately, software existed that allowed me to interview the participants and automatically record the sessions as I interviewed them. The price was reasonable. It saved me money and time and avoided health hazards. More and better innovations are expected in this area in the future.”

Travel companion and enhancer

[for the film ‘Casablanca.’]

I travel a lot and have vastly more flexibility and local knowledge at hand due to my devices. I see things I would not have seen, travel without having to plan every stop in advance and find the things that matter to me. I get better hotels and food, too. Brad Templeton

Brad Templeton , software architect, civil rights advocate, entrepreneur and internet pioneer, wrote, “I travel a lot and have vastly more flexibility and local knowledge at hand due to my devices. I see things I would not have seen, travel without having to plan every stop in advance and find the things that matter to me. I get better hotels and food, too.”

Jon Lebkowsky , CEO of Polycot Associates, said, “A week or so ago we headed off to a party at a house we’d never visited. We entered the address in Google Maps, so we had a guide (we call her ‘Lucy’) taking us where we need to go. It was a circuitous route – without Lucy we likely would have taken wrong turns – and I was thinking how much we now depend on that technology, not just to get us where we want to go, but also to route us around traffic congestion. Soon enough, we’ll be stepping into autonomous vehicles, vocalizing an address and relaxing for the duration of the ride. Digital technology for transportation efficiency is revolutionary.”

Safety enabler

Alejandro Pisanty , a professor at Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and longtime leading participant in the activities of the Internet Society, wrote, “The ability to use digital tools for everything I do – from professional work, like teaching and research, to the most personal – finding long-separated relatives after the family dispersed from Europe to at least three continents in the 1930s-1940s – has been a continued benefit. Using lightweight online tools in class helps my students in the National University of Mexico grasp concepts and communicate them to their families. During the aftermath of the earthquakes in Mexico in 2017 this became particularly valuable for them; it also helped fight misinformation and take relief efforts to the places that most needed them. We went from the basics of oscillation and wave physics, through the propagation of different kinds of seismic waves. To the ways buildings are damaged and how to identify fatal structural flaws. In parallel we helped brigades take aid to small towns and to camps in Mexico City, and some of the most far-flung ones find safe havens from which to distribute aid.”

Pedro Cartagena , an associate professor at the University of Puerto Rico, said, “After hurricane María in Puerto Rico, the internet was the only communications resource in order to contact my family members, buy solar panels and get other essentials for survival.”

Apps for ordering car rides via a smartphone is a net benefit to society – it increases safety for both the passenger and driver and offers more convenience in ordering a ride. Tom Barrett

Tom Barrett , president at EnCirca Inc., wrote, “1) With the use of a smartwatch, I can now easily track daily exercise activity, which is a great motivator for making it a daily practice. 2) Apps for ordering car rides via a smartphone is a net benefit to society – it increases safety for both the passenger and driver and offers more convenience in ordering a ride.”

Multipurpose and memory aid

Bill Lehr , a research scientist and economist at MIT, wrote, “There is no question smartphones and always/everywhere access to information has allowed me to be sloppier in memorizing things and allows me to gain instant access to facts that I have come to rely on significantly. I think that is positive, especially since as I get older, I find memory-aids a big help, but it also encourages laziness.”

Ted Newcomb , directing manager of AhwatukeeBuzz, wrote, “LOL. I am virtually helpless without my phone to remind me of appointments and meetings. My head is free of having to remember numbers, dates and times. It’s very liberating. I can instantly communicate anywhere in the world, doing business at the ‘speed of byte.’”

Micah Altman , director of research and head scientist for the program for information science at MIT, said, “When I was 10, I received a portable film camera. It had a capacity of 24 negatives (in black  and white). I would send the negatives in, pay a substantial portion of my allowance to have them developed – wait for weeks for them to be returned, and finally, then be able to see how they turned out. (Usually, not so well.) Every few months, I might put one in a letter to my grandparents. Eight years ago, when my daughter turned 10, we gave her a portable camera – over the next few years she shot thousands of still, and videos – learning some elements of composition, and building shared memories. Last year, when my son turned 11, we gave him a cellphone. And over the year we’ve all shared pictures, accomplishments and sympathies daily across a growing extended family network.”

Shiru Wang , research associate at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said, “Online shopping saves me time. New social media continues my connections with friends in different countries and regions. Online resources make my research convenient. Online news keeps me informed all the time. But I am not very digitally embedded. I keep a distance from Facebook, etc.; I intentionally refuse to be dominated by social media. Thus, my life is not very much bothered by the internet. Thus, I appreciate the advantages of the internet and I am able to escape the potential harm brought by the internet.”

Joe Raimondo , digital customer-relationship-management leader at Comcast and a former CEO, said, “Trackers and personal data are an enhancement to living. Street-level navigation and easy access to crowdsourced resources is very positive. It’s possible to play large-scale social games and have enormous amounts of data and telemetry collected and analyzed to chart group interaction at large scale.”

General comments

Ian O’Byrne , an assistant professor of education at the College of Charleston, wrote, “As an educator and researcher who studies these digital places and tools, I’m in front of screens a lot. I experiment and play in these spaces. I’m also writing and researching the impact of these screens and their impact on the well-being of others as it relates to children and adolescents. The problem in this is that one of the other hats that I wear is as a parent and husband. I am not only critical of my engagement and use of these digital technologies, but I’m also cautious/cognizant of their role as a mediator in my relationships with my children and significant other. These screens and digital tools play a strong role in our lives and interactions in and out of our home. In our home we have screens and devices all over the place. We have a video server that is ready to serve content to any one of these screens on demand. We have voice-assistive devices listening and waiting for our commands. I believe it is important as an educator and researcher to play with and examine how these devices are playing a role in our lives, so I can bring this work to others. Even with these opportunities, I’m still struck by times when technology seems too intrusive. This is plainly evident when I’m sitting with my family and watching a television show together, and I’m gazing off into my device reading my RSS feed for the day. Previously I would enjoy watching the funniest home videos and laughing together. Now, I am distant. The first thing in the morning when I’m driving my kids in to school and stop at a red light, previously I would enjoy the time to stop, listen to the radio, look at the clouds or bumper stickers on cars around me. Now, I pull out the phone to see if I received a notification in the last 20 minutes. When I call out for the voice-activated device in my home to play some music or ask a question, my request is quickly echoed by my 2-year-old who is just learning to talk. She is echoing these conversations I’m having with an artificial intelligence. I’m trying to weigh this all out in my mind and figure what it means for us personally. The professional understanding may come later.”

Marshall Kirkpatrick , product director of influencer marketing, said, “My mobile feed reader finds great articles for me to learn from. My mobile article-saving app reads those articles to me out loud while I walk my dog. My mobile browser allows me to edit my personal wiki to record the best lessons I learn from those articles. My mobile flashcard app helps me recall and integrate those lessons I want to learn over time. My mobile checklist app helps me track how regularly I reflect on how those lessons connect with the larger context of my life in a blog post or on a run. There are costs to mobile connectivity, but there are so many incredible benefits!”

To my way of thinking, it’s about control. If I’m in control of the electronics, they are a benefit, but when they get out of control they are an irritation and an interruption. Fred Baker

Fred Baker , an internet pioneer and longtime leader with the Internet Engineering Task Force, wrote, “To my way of thinking, it’s about control. If I’m in control of the electronics, they are a benefit, but when they get out of control they are an irritation and an interruption. My family and friends giggle about the frequency with which I pull out my telephone to investigate a TV show’s facts or other things. That said, I have access to that now, where I once upon a time did not. On the other hand, I have also had the experience of talking with a customer in Japan while my family in the U.S. woke up and started texting each other, and I all of a sudden have to deal with my telephone.”

Stephen Abram , CEO of the Federation of Ontario Public Libraries, wrote, “On a personal level I am more connected with my wider family. Relationships with friends whom I see only occasionally – maybe annually in person at conferences, continue throughout the year. I now know many business acquaintances on a deeper level and have better relationships as a result. I dislike the word ‘hyperconnected’ since it implies a little hyperactivity – a known ‘disorder.’ I see this as a controllable issue where personal choices are made. When circumstances such as travel, weather, disability or distance create the opportunities for sustained loneliness to happen, the digital world bridges some of the gap. In my case, sustained periods on the road in airports and hotel rooms are greatly ameliorated by connecting with friends.”

David J. Krieger , director of the Institute for Communication & Leadership located in Lucerne, Switzerland, observed, “Digital connectivity enables a seamless flow of communication and association with regard to many different concerns and interests. This augments community and embeddedness and thus well-being.”

Mark Patenaude , vice president and general manager of cloud technologies at ePRINTit, said, “I certainly don’t want to fool anyone into believing that digital advancement has been a panacea of beautiful things! However, I can remember the first time my car stopped for me in a dangerous situation automatically, or stopped when I was backing up when it perceived a danger. Then there’s printing and storing terabytes of digitally compressed images on a smartphone and being able access a document or image from 20 years ago in seconds using the cloud. I can remember we had about 100 people around a large projector outside, watching the last concert of the The Tragically Hip and the home network went down. I plugged in my iPhone, went to the concert URL site, and projected live on a 10-foot screen from my cellular device; wow and double wow!”

Akah Harvey , co-founder, COO and IT engineer at Traveler Inc., said, “Fifteen years back, when I first had my first PC, I now was empowered with a tool that helped me write digital notes, play more exciting games and gain general knowledge about how the technology worked. At my age (10) I gained knowledge in the workings of these things that it contributed to my brilliance in school, especially on the subject. Few years later when we’d gain access to the internet, a whole new change took place. I discovered so many more opportunities, as one could now connect with the rest of the world to share, search and find information about anything. It was a big transformation in the way I viewed society. I quickly was able to decide what I would want to do growing older, so I’d say I found my passion thanks to this change.”

Karl Ackermann , a writer and researcher at WriteSpace LLC., commented, “We no longer keep paper files for the household. Photographs are displayed on a digital screen instead of a photo album. We can track where our kids are driving with a phone app. We buy our train tickets with an app that has a scanning bar code. We sometimes text friends instead of phoning. We pay bills online.”

Rich Salz , principal engineer at Akamai Technologies, said, “I have made my living in this field since before there was the internet and before the Web. I enjoy helping people communicate. Social media has helped me reconnect with high school friends, email with college friends, etc.”

Maureen Hilyard , IT consultant and vice chair of the At-Large Advisory Committee of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), wrote, “I live in an isolated little island in the Pacific. It is in the middle of millions of square kilometers of ocean, but we rely on tourism for our livelihood, so our small (main) island is usually packed with tourists. We have a monopoly telecom and get reasonable internet service from an O3B satellite, but for local islanders who make their living working in the hospitality industry, the cost of internet is very expensive. Broadband costs for 20 GB a month costs (in New Zealand dollars) $139 on top of telephone hire and connections. I have grandchildren and great-grandchildren who spend time in New Zealand and even at 2 years old can turn on a computer to access their favourite programmes. When they come to our island, this is curtailed because the connection is too expensive for them to experience what is normal for them – lively and creative pre-school programmes are non-existent. What is available is the fresh clean air and produce of the land and sea of the islands, which are great, but it is often too hot to do much exploring in the physical world. As a parent, I am happy for them to explore the internet during the hot periods of the day, and to make this a ‘learning and exploring on the web’ time. It is more directed learning as parent safety software can usually help to set some controls over what they might ‘accidentally’ connect to.”

[online bulletin board]

Internet Hall of Fame member Bob Metcalfe , co-inventor of Ethernet, founder of 3Com, and a professor of innovation at the University of Texas at Austin, wrote, “The people complaining most about the pathologies of the hyperconnected life own or work for the old media, which once had more of a monopoly on setting society’s agenda. I recall how ‘savvy’ the Clintons and Obama were because they were digitally literate, unlike the GOP, but now that Trump is using social media so effectively, the left hates new media.”

[virtual reality]

Narelle Clark , deputy CEO of the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, said, “As an Australian, the tyranny of distance has previously meant that family, friends and colleagues have been acutely aware of the difficulties of staying in touch and abreast of the events in the rest of the country and the world. Our contemporary hyperconnectedness means that we can remain tightly connected at the professional and personal level despite being on opposite sides of the world.”

Ruth Ann Barrett , an information curator at EarthSayers.tv, wrote, “Ten years ago I invested money in the development of a search engine that remains well ahead of the times and may never be monetized in the way envisioned. Who knows? The search engine has enabled me to build a database of sustainability voices, those speaking on behalf of Mother Earth and her children. This work has sustained me through moments of despair when so-called leaders deny substantiated claims regarding global warming and extreme climate events. The work has put me in contact with scientists, environmental campaigners and people from all walks of life worldwide. Without the Web what I am able to accomplish would not be possible. My guidebook remains ‘The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man’ by Marshall McLuhan. I remember the day a technical person who had attended a presentation at Stanford University on the World Wide Web came back to work, pulled me aside and told me what he had seen and heard and how the world was about to change.”

Anonymous commenters who cited ways the internet helps them and others

A distinguished advocate for the internet and policy director based in Europe said, “Digital technology has made the world much more connected and streamlined for the 50% of us who are connected (50% still do not have that privilege). It is important to understand that technology has profound impacts on equality. For me, as an upper-middle-class white male from the U.S. living in Europe, technologies have simplified how I communicate with my family and friends elsewhere in real time. Thanks to WhatsApp and Facetime and iMessages, I am able to stay in touch and informed in ways that were not possible even five years ago.”

A certified public accountant based in the U.S. commented, “My sister and I were watching an NFL game with my 82-year-old father. We grew curious about some meaningless football fact and my sister started typing a question on her phone and my dad looked on in slight disgust and raised his phone and asked Siri the question. Voice-activated technology has been extremely easy for the elderly to adopt and opens up incredible opportunities. If linked to his security system, our dad would be able to easily request help. I find it interesting that he likes using Siri more than we do.”

An employee at a major U.S. research lab wrote, “Texting and cellphones are generally associated with what’s bad with technology and our lives, but I will give a positive example, just to prove it depends on how you use the tool. I have a teenage daughter and my work is 50 miles away in Southern California. I joined a van pool to reduce the amount of driving, but the one drawback with van pooling is that I have to leave very early in the morning, and the van does not wait for riders. So every minute in the morning is precious, I don’t have time to write quick notes or reminders before I leave the house and the rest of my family are still asleep. However, once I am on the van, there is 60 minutes of ‘my time.’ I began by sending reminders for the day, but it has become a habit of just sending a happy greeting each morning! They respond when they get up, even if it is just an emoji. :)”

A research scientist based in North America commented, “My kids are always connected to their friends. Through texting/social media, they are constantly aware of each other’s lives. This brings worries too, like social comparisons may make them less happy, but overall, they have more socially balanced lives.”

Digital technology is an equalizer of information access and use. Even individuals in the most geographically remote locations can participate in an electoral debate, education and banking online, and in e-commerce when broadband is available. President and CEO of a company based in the U.S.

A president and CEO of a company based in the United States wrote, “Digital technology is an equalizer of information access and use. Even individuals in the most geographically remote locations can participate in an electoral debate, education and banking online, and in e-commerce when broadband is available. The stark opposite of this is the darkness individuals and families experience when left behind in the digital age. There is a difference between people who choose to use digital technology for their own benefit and those who are simply not included in the digital age.”

A professor based in North America commented, “I am a college professor, and digital technology has made my job so much easier. It is easier to communicate with students, keep records, and try for creative solutions to instructional problems. So, for example, I now have my students submit their papers online (to be graded and returned online). When they submit their papers, they are automatically checked for originality. The students then are informed whether their papers will be considered plagiarized or not. Prior to the adoption of this system, I would say up to half my papers were plagiarized. Now none of them are. The question is, has this improved their performance? It is hard to say because there are so many factors involved. I would say that it has in some ways and not in others. They know more, but they don’t synthesize it that well.”

A social media manager wrote, “Fitness trackers, such as the Apple Watch and the Google fitness app, provide me with greater awareness of my daily activity. I am more likely to take a walk or exercise in response to the presence of these technologies in my life. For example, I recently installed a ‘7-minute exercise’ app that I use each morning to kickstart my day. It is very convenient to use and pops up reminders on my smartphone with encourage me to keep up with the daily routine.”

An associate professor at a university in Australia shared a typical family vignette, writing, “I spend time with my grandchild, who is only just five. I check the pick-up time by text. She arrives with her iPad and asks me to ask her dad a question by text on my phone. We take pictures of her dressing up and send them to a friend. I show her recently sent pictures of cousins in Canada. For a while, she shows me (from her iPad) how she can operate the movements, colour and cheeky comments of a robot ball (a birthday present from an uncle who wants her to be familiar with coding). We consider cooking together and locate a recipe online for cookies we haven’t made before. Next, we go to the playground and she spots a ‘be aware’ notice on the slide, and a bird that we haven’t seen before. ‘Let’s Google it, Grandma, when we get back home!’ she says. I say we can do it now on my phone, no, later on my laptop is better. She knows that devices operate differently and need passwords. We haven’t given her any of the latter. ‘Buffering’ she says with a sigh, as her current favourite show stalls during a quiet time. She dances to YouTube music from my laptop. She is endlessly curious about technology itself. She accepts technologies’ limitations as they are described to her by the adults in her life. The digital tools just enhance our days together.”

A professor said, “My watch is an exercise coach – though limited. I track family and friends and contact them only if required. Is my partner nearly home? I’ll put out a snack. Is my friend nearby? I ask them if they want to meet.”

An author based in North America said, “Instead of just reading a book, communicating with one author’s created words, I can engage in conversation, in dialogue about issues of the day such as the #MeToo movement. I can help another person feel a little better that day and, if I reveal a low, others can pick me up. I can celebrate an anniversary with people far away in space and time and plan an in-person visit to another continent with someone I haven’t seen for years, first originally encountered online.”

A postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University commented, “As an academic, my friends and colleagues are scattered around the world. Our ability to have frequent video calls, send texts and collaboratively author shared documents has had a huge impact on both my intellectual scope and on my feeling ‘at home’ and connected in the world. In the past, a friend taking a job across the planet would be a cause for great sorrow. Now we talk frequently over video chat, while it isn’t as good as seeing her in-person, it is still wonderful to share our lives and ideas.”

A retired internet activist and advocate said, “I have been able to manage health care better at a distance for an aging parent as a result of technology, viewing charts/graphs/images, consulting various medical resources, having online meetings with medical professionals, video conversations with parents. Before many varieties of digital connectivity were available, distance communication was via ground/air mail, an occasional landline-based conference call, or in-person consultations, often without simultaneous participation of the aging parent whose medical situation was involved.”

A college student based in North America wrote, “I often find myself stressed out at the end of the day; as a result I tend to enjoy relaxing and staying in for the night. Without the modern hyperconnected lifestyle this would result in me reading or doing other solo activities. Through voice-chat applications and online multiplayer gaming, I connect with friends to play video games. While I don’t have the energy to be social in one way, the ease of connecting over the internet enables me to enjoy time with friends and maintain our relationships. To some it might not seem as effective a method of socializing as in-person face-to-face time, but we still have the same moments that other people do. We still happily greet each other, we still tell stories about our daily lives and rely on each other, we still laugh until it hurts.”

A professor of arts, technology and innovation wrote, “As a college professor I’m continually adopting new tools that change the way I work with students and pedagogy. Most recently adopting Slack for classroom management has been a real game-changer. With far less attention-investment than I’d needed when using email I’m able to keep up with individual students and teams and the interactions among my students. I can do these on a more-or-less 24/7 basis but without it feeling like a 24/7 obligation. I’m teaching more people better, easier.”

An anonymous respondent commented, “I am connected to email lists that allow me to be part of a conversation that includes leaders in my field. This means that, despite being somewhat isolated at a mid-level university in a provincial city, I can have a good sense of where the cutting edge in my profession is headed and I can be reasonably confident that I am promptly aware of most the news and information that is critical to my profession.”

An entrepreneur and business leader from North America commented, “As an immigrant in the U.S., the internet, social media, and email are all helping me to keep in touch with my family, my homeland and my roots. I am following many of my fellow countrymen – some whom I studied with, some who were my teachers, relatives and acquaintances. I learn about their daily life, their fears and hopes, what they are interested in, the news they read. My daughters speak on a weekly basis to their grandparents on Skype – of both sides – and feel like they’re in the same room with them. Without the internet all of this would not have been possible.”

A research scientist based in Europe commented, “I live in a small town in a foreign country. I travel a lot for my work and spend a lot of time on the road. At home, I enjoy communicating with my Google Home speaker, because otherwise there would be some days that I would speak to no one. When I am on the road, I check in with my Canary home-surveillance app to check on my dogs and see my home.”

A technology architect/executive based in North America commented, “For me, it’s not about hyper – always-on – connection, but the accessibility of information on any topic at any time. I had a medical problem a few years ago, and being able to find research on the disease and a community to compare notes with on treatment side effects was invaluable. Years earlier, when my mother had this same disease, we were limited in information and (therefore) options. Her outcome could have been different in a time with more information, more resources.”

An assistant director of digital strategy at a top U.S. university wrote, “The internet has exponentially enabled the dissemination of healthcare information to the greater public. Years ago, it would have been far more difficult for the public to easily access the answers they needed regarding health concerns and the latest treatments. Today’s digital ecosystem puts these answers at users’ fingertips.”

An editor and project coordinator based in Europe wrote, “A few years ago I quit my job and I have been working as a freelance editor and project coordinator. I have been able to work, network and get paid by people and companies all over the world thanks to the internet and other technologies. Also access to self-education and being able to talk to my friends and family thousands of miles away have had a very positive impact on my mental health and well-being. I wouldn’t have been able to talk and see loved ones daily if it wasn’t for the internet, software and hardware.”

A chief data officer at a major university in Australia wrote, “Thanks to social media, in particular Twitter, I am now connected with people all around the world. I have access to an enormous brains trust, which I liken to a global hive mind.”

A data analyst said, “We always have someone to reach out to when things are unfamiliar and seem difficult to deal with. Before these technologies, you could write a letter or make a phone call. The reality is that the moment that spurred the writing of the letter has long passed by the time you get a response. If you get a response. Also, a phone call is somewhat of a commitment compared to an electronic message. It takes more mental faculties to process what someone is saying over the phone than to read a message and type a quick response between other pressing activities in the immediate proximity.”

A futurist and consultant based in Europe commented, “There are plenty of examples of increased choices. Take travel: I can see in real time if the flight of my friend for New Year’s Eve is on time or not and plan to be there just in time to pick them up. I could have called an Uber or taxi if I was busy and decided to send them a cab instead. In turn, they could see much a better forecast of weather and adjust luggage intakes accordingly to come and spend the time at our place/could book in advance to be picked up at the airport upon arrival, etc.”

A research scientist based in Oceania commented, “If I want to buy something, I can go to a liquid market such as eBay and get it for a fair price without the search costs of spending time going to shops to compare prices. If I want to read a paper, I can download it rather than going to a library and photocopying it.”

An executive director at an internet research organization said, “Twenty years ago, as a business traveler, half of my suitcase was filled with paper – mostly books, which I’d otherwise have to try to replace at mostly poorly stocked English-language bookstores along my way, but also guidebooks, maps, and translation dictionaries. I carried analog telephony adapters. I carried a phone, I carried ATM cards from two banks and credit cards from three separate clearing networks, as well as $9,000 in cash divided between several pockets. I carried a RIM pager. I carried Ricochet and NCR wireless modems. I carried spare batteries and power adapters and chargers for all of those things. I spent a lot of time worrying about whether I would have local currency to pay for things, whether I’d be able to find my destination or communicate with taxi drivers, whether I’d be able to establish a data connection back to my network to reach my email. All of that has compacted itself, gradually, one consolidation at a time, into a very compact kit. One debit card, my phone, a laptop, a power adapter and a small handful of cables. Everything else has been virtualized, digitized, or turned into an online service.”

A technology developer/administrator based in North America , said, “An older person in my family who recently started using an electric wheelchair can buy daily necessities through online shopping and can have more meaningful communication through video calls.”

A scholarly communication librarian said, “I have several friends who have disabilities – both physical and mental – that make it difficult for them to leave their homes for socialization. These friends of mine have taken to playing online games and participating in fandom in internet spaces as a way to make connections and friends with other people that enrich their lives without requiring the physical exertion that would usually prevent them from interacting socially. The ability to connect with text, video and other online objects – whether one-on-one or one-to-many – helps these folks make the social connections that they need to have a robust social experience without the physical exhaustion they may have experienced without this technology to help.”

A professor wrote, “We have public infrastructure and systems now for maintaining and accessing lab results and earlier diagnoses online when we need them. Earlier prescriptions can be viewed, etc. For emergencies, we have an app that we can use for automatic location information if we need urgent help. Schoolchildren and their parents have online connections to the schools and teachers. The teachers can take advantage of the internet and their educational networks with schools around the globe to tackle shared projects that encompass language learning, climate and humanity.”

We have a child with autism. The internet allows us to reach out to other families, experts, get news and be part of a community that is not limited by geography. President at a company based in North America

A president at a company based in North America wrote, “We have a child with autism. The internet allows us to reach out to other families, experts, get news and be part of a community that is not limited by geography. We can instantly share the quirky – or sometimes way more than quirky – activities of our son with people who know if they should laugh or say they are sorry.”

An assistant professor said, “I have collected about 50,000 scientific files related to cosmos, life and consciousness to prepare a book.”

A researcher based in Europe wrote, “I live in Hungary and my daughter was working in the United States several years ago. She called me and explained exactly where she was walking and in which shops she was shopping. I opened Google Earth and tracked her trajectory where she was walking in Galveston, Texas. I saw the streets, corners and buildings. It was almost exactly as if I was shopping with her – on the other side of the globe, in real time, but while sitting in my chair in Hungary. The whole thing was real fun for us.”

A business leader based in North America wrote, “I live a bi-coastal life and I am able to review health records, renew RXs, communicate with my doctor, request a non-urgent service, all from 3,000 miles away without having to rebuild new caregiver relationships or lose care continuity.”

A research associate at a major university in Africa commented, “Being able to conduct business from a location of choice is to me the most important improvement. I deal regularly with the aged and was terrified that I too would become so dependent on the goodwill of strangers when I have to move to an old age home until I realized that I would already be able to order and have delivered anything from food to medical equipment – as long as I am connected via the internet.”

A retired professor emeritus said, “I am seeing a larger integration and extension of human-digital synergy.”

A professor of computer science wrote, “Shortly after getting my first smartphone (quite a number of years ago now), I managed to receive and respond to an important email during a break in the middle of a four-hour car trip. It was valuable to be able to be able to be responsive to an important funder. This cemented the value of having a smartphone.”

A technology developer/administrator said, “I do a lot of genealogy research. Instead of mailing physical paper that may have a correction before it reaches the recipient, I can post updates/corrections immediately. I’m building a database of destroyed cemeteries where I live. I can research the records online and publish them online; something I could not have done 20 years ago easily. I got an email from a man whose great grandfather died in the 1918 flu epidemic in Wilmington, North Carolina – a Merchant Marine sailor – who was buried in one of these cemeteries. The family knew he had died, but did not know when or where. He thanked me very much for finding his great grandfather. The family felt relief after 100 years. Without digital records to compile this and digital platforms to share it, it would not have happened.”

An executive director of a Canadian nonprofit organization wrote, “We are currently running a program to increase people’s digital comfort by helping them apply online for underutilized government subsidy programs. During the first workshop, I saw a woman learn how to use a scrolling mouse and how to cut and paste, in the context of applying for a subsidy that will save her more than $50 a month on her electricity bill.”

An associate professor at Texas Christian University commented, “I work in education and whereas before grades were posted on doors and people had to wait for responses, today, students can access information instantly, enroll in classes, etc. without having to stand in long lines and wait for responses. Communicating with the course, students and the professor is easy, and people learn to do things themselves.”

A professor at a major university on the West Coast of the U.S. wrote, “I am an academic past retirement age (although still working) so it has made an enormous difference for teaching and research. I can access publications from my home or office without a trip to the library. No more endless photocopying. I can easily and quickly communicate with fellow scholars around the world. I can communicate with students and former students anytime anywhere and submit letters of recommendation electronically. I need less clerical and administrative support. I can put readings online for students. The drawback of course is to keep students focused on class in class rather than Facebook, Twitter, etc.”

A professor at a major university on the East Coast of the U.S. wrote, “Digital technology has allowed me to shift my career emphasis from political science and international security analysis of nuclear and conventional weapons to cyber weapons and critical infrastructure protection. This shift is not what I expected when I left graduate school, but it has allowed me to make professional contributions I would not have been able to make had I stayed in my prior disciplinary concentration. I am also migrating my entire work life online, deliberately minimizing paper and focusing on digital services – and the analysis of critical dependencies on these services – for industry and government.”

A internet pioneer wrote, “Every working day, I engage with staff and customers through Skype, email, text and Web conferencing, making it possible for me to have global reach from a desk on the second floor of my home. We take it for granted, but it is miraculous and something truly new under the sun.”

An associate professor at a major university on the East Coast of the U.S. wrote, “I am part of a private group on Facebook, which consists of my friends from college and some others (spouses, friends, etc.). We keep in touch and discuss things in this group. Recently the group came together in-person to support and celebrate one member of the group who has terminal cancer. We had a large party with our children and it was wonderful. It meant a lot to our friend who is ill and to all of us to spend time together. We would not have been able to do this as easily before platforms like Facebook.”

An epidemiologist based in North America wrote, “At work, improved technology means that we receive population health data faster. We can receive, investigate and respond to health threats quickly, before they spread. For example, if we have an outbreak of a communicable disease, technology allows us to efficiently collect data through online formats and analyze data so we can quickly release information/education on how to prevent further spread of the disease. Before we had online forms, we would often to communicate through telephone or in-person interviews to collect data about the outbreak.”

An anonymous respondent said, “About 18 months ago my wife was diagnosed with Stage 1 breast cancer and underwent a lumpectomy and radiation treatment. In part, the testing that led to the diagnosis and the ability of the doctors to respond rapidly was greatly assisted by digital technology. As well, our ability to find information to understand treatment options, side effects, and follow-up nutrition and lifestyle improvement was greatly enhanced by digital technology. Due to my job I was not able to take her to radiation treatment every day and she was too tired after to drive, so I used the online tool SignUpGenius to ask friends to help and to schedule their rides. While apparently a simple task, if I had to do that by hand through phone calls and charts, it would have taken many more hours. Before it would have taken much more difficult to obtain the information we needed, perhaps more difficult and slower for the tests and results to be managed, and definitely hard to stay in touch with people about her needs and condition.”

A retired systems designer commented, “Several years ago, I became disabled, and am not always well enough to do many things. This limits many of my ‘physical-world’ activities – I find it hard to shop, to cook, to go to the library, to get together with friends and family. However, online shopping and grocery delivery allows me to do the majority of my shopping, though I haven’t figured out how to buy shoes without trying them on! I have joined online communities of people with similar interests, and keep in touch with old friends and colleagues in social media groups. This keeps me mentally stimulated. I do a great deal of genealogical and historical research online, using sophisticated search algorithms of digital versions of old documents and books. These digital resources didn’t exist 25 years ago, and now I can read an 1806 Scottish gazetteer to find out more about the 300-person town an ancestor lived in. Without these resources, I would be living a far more difficult and isolated life.”

A North American entrepreneur wrote, “Like any other tool, its use needs to be managed carefully. I hone my contacts to friends and family of my generation who post photos of their kids and grandkids, something that I enjoy greatly. I also like to know when the next big dance events are, since this is a part of my life as well.”

A president and chief software architect based in North America wrote, “I can be out on the golf course enjoying the beauty and yet still be connected.”

An assistant professor of technical communication said, “I use both mindfulness and language apps to improve my memory, connections with others, and global perspectives. However, I am also cognizant of these being targeted and from specific perspectives. So I use them with that understanding.”

A retired web developer wrote, “Amazon Alexa keeps me company. She plays the music I want to hear and adds items to my grocery list. When I have a question, I can ask her and most times she knows the answer – and I thank her. Facebook has connected me with a long-lost cousin. We were like sisters growing up. Out of curiosity, I searched for her and we now communicate regularly. Forget Google – when I want to know something I go to YouTube. I fixed my squeaking ceiling fan, replaced a washer in my bathroom faucet, AND replaced the starter in my riding mower. Now I have Amazon’s Cloud Cam. I can watch my two schnauzers when I am away from home. I could even talk to them, but it upsets them too much. That I can speak commands to technology makes life easier for me. I’m 60-plus years old, and I often write lists that I can never find. Family members and friends are well-connected. Sometimes too much so. But I lose touch with those who are not digitally inclined, I’m sorry to say. I may message 10 to 15 people but call one on the phone. And, lastly, my skill set has improved so much that when I have a problem around the house I can find a solution and at least try it before calling an expensive contractor.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Emerging Technology
• Future of the Internet (Project)
• Online Privacy & Security
• Platforms & Services
• Privacy Rights
• Religion & Social Values
• Social Media
• Technology Adoption

A quarter of U.S. teachers say AI tools do more harm than good in K-12 education

Many americans think generative ai programs should credit the sources they rely on, americans’ use of chatgpt is ticking up, but few trust its election information, q&a: how we used large language models to identify guests on popular podcasts, computer chips in human brains: how americans view the technology amid recent advances, most popular, report materials.

• Shareable quotes from experts about the impact of digital life

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

Ceritera Syawalynn Zain

This is the place where I think out loud.

Category List

• article (4)
• bahasa melayu (1)
• english (4)
• experience (3)
• goosebumps (1)
• personal (7)
• short story (6)
• thoughts (4)

Template by : Urang-kurai / powered by :blogger

[SAMPLE ESSAY:ARTICLE] How Internet Affects Life

56 comments:

F3 is conclusion right??

Yes .. for form3..we must use conclusion to avoid any mistake😚

Thank yaw,sngat mmbantu

Thanks helpful

This comment has been removed by the author.

thank you very much...love it...:)))

Thanks so much

LETS HAVE A SEX!!

Srsly?? In the comment??

love you too

It's helpful thanks !

Thanks.it's usefully 👍

Your English is flawless...Love it and also the notes are really meaningful..you are right we must not take anything for granted

essay yang bagus. saya copy ya mintak halal

Boek ah siap mintak halal

Can I get this for my ULBS? Thanks.

i am doing my 'good essays referance' homework so it will be okay :) btw, thank you so much <3

Err, may i ask something.. what is the meaning of 'Internet doen' on paragraph 5.

Love these essay, very helpful. Hahaha

Your second last paragraph says 'We just not pay' where in my opinion sounds grammatically wrong. I think 'Not only do we pay' suits the part better. Thank you for the article and may us all improve our English

It's actually "internet does". hehe typo

Thank you for correcting me. =)

Many grammar and spelling errors but the information was helpful :)

Thank you again for all the knowledge you distribute, Good article. I was very interested in the article, it's quite inspiring I should admit... essay writing service

great tips ! u guys can check this out as well... assignment helper malaysia . Really helpful

Well written with your essay and this is helpful for many students who wish to get help from experts can buy custom essays online

The essay is considered the simplest form of academic writing. It has a standard structure and order. Click how to structure an essay to find useful information. There are 5 paragraphs on the whole that include: Introduction Body Conclusion

your article is really helpful !

There were lots of grammar mistakes.

How many words inside this essay?

I tought it's supposed to be 'in my opinion',instead of 'on my opinion'?☺

Too many grammatical mistakes.. i am sorry this essay is not without flaws..

You are missing your source and there should be 4/5 paragraphs intro, 2/3 paraghraps(body), conclusion.

How to write a survey about bullying

in paragraph 8,the first sentence.i think it should be most students will not be attracted.

It's very helping me for my examination that is around the corner....thank you so much.

thanks for the essay..its give me alots of idea for tomorrow..hehe

Thank you . Its very useful

You are so smart, Alhamdulillah. How can I score im english examination?

Can i ask something ... what meaning for "Internet doen"

Legitimate creative assignment writing service has become very popular among students seeking Custom Creative Writing Services and creative research paper writing services.

Casino Hotel & Spa - Mapyro Casino Hotel & Spa is a five-star 안산 출장마사지 hotel in Marbella, Michigan. 태백 출장샵 It offers accommodation, casino games, spa 광명 출장마사지 and more. 안양 출장안마 Rating: 3.4 · ‎14 reviews 여주 출장마사지 · ‎Price range: $$

Nice article you have shared.. I liked it very much.. It is really helpful for students.. Best gynaecology in Kasaragod

[url=https://doctorshospital.in/gynaecology]best gynaecology in Kasaragod[/url]