Posted: August 30, 2010
A Reality Review And A Point
Consider this: If you are 30 years old, you were born before the personal computer had arrived.
If you are 20 years old, you were born almost before anyone was sending email.
Only within the last 10 years have we witnessed the coming of Facebook and it’s been less than five years since Twitter entered the scene.
What’s happening is that technology rather than age is determining the coming of a new generation. “Old” is no longer a label you can stick only on someone who has been around for 60 or 50 or even 40 years.
Even 30 year olds who consider themselves as young and “with it,” are beginning to be looked upon by 15 year olds as the new “old fogeys.”
So if you believe you have finally mastered the challenge of overcoming generational differences, I hate to tell you but the sand is still shifting.
Yet, that’s only for openers.
Many if not most everyone under the age of 25 are devoting a significant chunk of every day to Internet social media, texting and cell phone activity. More and more older adults are also joining in.
None of this has been lost on marketers and advertisers who, not limiting themselves to only one side of an unturned stone, are turning it over to reveal the other side’s seemingly vast and untapped opportunities.
In the meantime, websites and blogs continue to add to the already raging and unrelenting stream of information. Along with them are more spam, scams, viruses and security breaches.
Not unexpectedly, however, we are now beginning to be reminded that what goes up must come down.
During a recent edition of “60 Minutes” Steve Croft was interviewing Mikhail Prokhorov, the 44-year old who has the distinction of being Russia’s richest man. Croft asked Prokhorov if he used a computer. He said he didn’t because “there’s already too much information and it’s impossible to handle it all.”
Rationalize it as an isolated incident if you wish, but Prokhorov isn’t alone. Many people are entertaining the same thought. Enough, it seems, really is enough.
Even I need not go far to see that.
Although ag journalism is my beat, boating has been my fun source for many years. Just recently on an email list for boaters, someone expressed an opinion about information overload only to be shot down by someone who wrote: “Nonsense. We can never have too much information.”
Yet, I see what’s happening in marinas. About 20 years ago, those cruising didn’t have a GPS or Internet access. They simply cruised and let discovery of the unknown fan their excitement. After cruising all day then arriving at a marina, they walked the docks and visited with either fellow boaters or the locals.
Now, they disappear into the innards of their boat and spend hours hunkered over their computer and cell phone as they attempt to gather every bit of information they can find concerning what they will be seeing the next day. In doing so, they are unwittingly stripping away some of the very qualities that have always made cruising a magical activity.
Eventually, scientists say, what we are doing in our attempt to accommodate all this new technology will eventually result in our genetic makeup being altered. Theoretically, at least, that will make it easier for humans to take it all in stride.
In the meantime, we, as journalists, are caught in the middle. We dare not ignore the technology that changes the way we communicate. But neither can we afford to ignore the downside in our attempts to embrace it.
At some point, we must take time to evaluate, conclude, declare and enforce.
That’s because no matter how exciting the methodology or how easily it can be rationalized as “progress,” it’s worthless unless properly used to convey the proper message to a specific audience. In our case, that means gathering, sorting, interpreting and delivering the message to farmers, ranchers and others in agriculture.
Most important, however, is that we must think our way through this process rather than merely acting through it. The challenge is not that of attempting to use all available technology but of selecting those parts offering the highest probability of working best for us.
Then we must direct that thinking beyond the chosen method(s) so as to include the quality of the information being shared and nature of the audience to which it’s being directed.
That disarmingly simple concept is difficult to grasp, particularly when you are doing your own little job, in a little space and in very little time.
But you must try because that’s the new reality now being thrust upon us.