Social networks are evil and will end, of not ending them with them, with democracy, with morals and with all the good, in general. That is why they are abandoned by ministers concerned about Concord, journalists against misinformation and bulos, activists … of all fair causes in alphabetical and feminist order of fourth or fifth wave (whatever).
Transseilative, anti -fascist, sexual dissidents, ecodepressed and Stephen King. Social networks and algorithm are an invention of the devil, technofascist alert, and we never saw each other in an equal. Never?
In the middle of the last century, the headlines of the newspapers warned of the ‘photomania’ and how the city was filled with images of unknown faces that sought to satisfy their vanity. By then, the photography processes had been accelerated and it began to be more affordable for the general public, which fell rendered and ignorant to this danger, although it would be necessary to wait until 1988 so that George Eastman and his Kodak were definitively democratized.
At that time, they would be the professional photographers, those indicated above to feed the superb of society, who would take their hands to their heads and alert their fellow citizens of the dangers that came over (now yes), because there would be a “depraved and irresponsible” use of it and there would be “too many photographs”, many of them, of course, obscene and indecent. Also in those years the phone was responsible for another “modern disease”: telephone.
In 1909, from the pages of the ‘Grand Forks Herald’, women were alerted to the dangers of modern literature: “minds are impoverished”
Thus he titled the ‘New York Tribune’ an article in 1887, in which he pointed out that he was one of “the last negative results of modern inventions”, and one of the great fears of the fellow citizens of those affected, “although they live frequently ignoring their ailment.” The ‘San Francisco Chronical’ went a little further and, in an article in which he “unmasked” on the phone, he pointed out that he would mean “the end of every secret: problems for lovers.”
Not even the novels were fought to be pointed out as a terrible form of entertainment (“it is never good to excite the mind or heart too much,” they wrote under the epigraph “too much reading” in 1863).
They were even pointed out as a cause of suicide or aggressions, as would later happen with video games or role -playing games. ‘The Boston Globe’, in March 1884, he defined them as “one of the serious social problems of the time” and explained that “the avalanche of cheap novels, wonderful feats and non -existent protagonists” was contributing to “corrupting youth”, and claimed stricter laws that safeguarded morality.
In 1909, from the pages of the ‘Grand Forks Herald’, women of the dangers of modern literature were alerted: “minds are impoverished.” “Read only one book a month,” they recommended, “slowly and slowly” because the novels “are like lion’s teeth, may seem good at the beginning but then grow and only cause damage and disgust.”
The list of “modern inventions” that scared the society of their time and threatened to corrupt and destroy it, plunge it into chaos and injustice, is unbarkable: from the telegraph to the radio, from music to the cinema, without forgetting the car, the plane, the bicycle, or the electricity. The current prophecies on our destination are not much more boldiers due to the perverse influence of social networks and the algorithms than those of our ancestors by novels, cinema or jazz. Not even the teddy bears got rid: to continue marketing them, they would annihilate the maternal instinct of the girls and would assume the suicide of humanity.
Cursed be, Twitter. And damn Teddy.
#Rebeca #Argudo #Modern #inventions
