Chuck Klosterman on the Downside of Disruption

chuck-klosterman-on-the-downside-of-disruption photo 1

I am a techno-optimist. I believe technology has been the chief engine behind most—if not all—human progress, but I acknowledge it can and has been used to harm.

Fire brought warmth to our ancestors' caves, but it also allowed them to commit the first acts of arson. Twitter amplified political dissidents but also trolls. Coins, two sides, and whatnot.

Still, I feel that when you look at history's BIG picture, you'll find that technology has improved the lives of most people (check out XPrize founder Peter Diamandis's 2012 TED talk on Abundance and see if you agree). Even with all my optimism, I am occasionally forced to question my tech assumptions, as was the case last week when essayist and best-selling author Chuck Klosterman stopped by our offices to shoot an episode of PCMag's Q&A series, The Convo.

Chuck came by to talk about new book Chuck Klosterman X (pronounced "Chuck Klosterman: Ten," for the record). But the conversation veered off into a discussion on how technology has affected just about everything. As a renowned cultural critic who exists in the modern mediasphere, Klosterman recognizes (if begrudgingly) that his life and career are inescapably connected to technology, but he doesn't feel all this stuff has necessarily made our lives any richer.

"All technology in the short-term is positive. But in the long-term is probably, to some degree, negative—outside of air conditioning," Klosterman explains. "Prior to the gramophone, if you were listening to music, you had to be there to experience it. There was no way to separate yourself from the fact that the music was a human creation. This is not just a collection of soundwaves or sonic experiences. This is a manifestation of someone's creativity, virtuosity, and ability.

"As soon as you give someone the ability to experience music without the musician in front of them, it changes the way you experience it. The idea of the medium is the messenger—that's true for everything. I do think the appreciation of music has been eroded by our ability to play it at distant locations."

Klosterman also laments the more obvious side effects—namely, the disruptive influence on jobs. While technology has affected just about every economic sector, its impact on the creative fields (Chuck's bread and butter) have been outsized. Just look how file-sharing transformed the music industry.

"Once a person believes that something should be free, there's no going back. There's never a movement from something being free back to something costing money," he notes. "It completely changed the music industry. Now, did it really change music? I guess if you're really a musician and what you love to do is this creative thing comes out of you, you don't care how you're being paid, or if you're being paid, but to the general public it's all totally different."

The Downside of Digital Democracy

Modern information technology is heralded for its ability to empower individuals. Anyone with a blog has as much potential reach as the world's largest newspaper, and anyone with a social media account has the power to broadcast their POV to the masses. Even the lowliest musician has as much access to distribution as a Kanye West or Rihanna.

But that's not the whole story, of course. The phrase "digital democratization" ostensibly describes how technology allows all people to be represented and have their voices heard. But as with any bumper sticker-sized phrase, there isn't a lot of room for nuance.

"We have been socialized to believe that if you put 'democracy' with anything, it is automatically good," says Klosterman. "But if I was like 'hey, let's democratize uranium—let's make sure everyone has weapons-grade uranium,' that would not be so great."

chuck-klosterman-on-the-downside-of-disruption photo 2

Perhaps the jump to nuclear weapons is an unfair comparison, but technology brings with it all sorts of unintended consequences. Just look at how journalism has changed over the past few decades—it's either imploded or exploded depending on your point of view.

"There's never been a time when it's been easier to get a job writing, but it's never been harder to make money doing it," Klosterman laments. "I don't think people go into journalism for the money—it would be crazy to do so. I think what has changed is how people have sort of given up the idea of objectivity in journalism. And what people want are things that support their biases.

"So, what you see is people going to journalism who are more into advocacy—be it social justice, or trying to move the meter back—all of these things. So, now there's a kind of journalism that is openly unobjective. Time has proven that audiences don't want objective news. They just don't. People want news to elucidate what they already feel."

People have been wringing their hands about technology's effects on society ever since the Industrial Revolution. And for the most part, we've managed to maintain our humanity. Yay for us. But in 2017, technology isn't only advancing, it's advancing faster. I still believe the end result will be a good thing, but it's probably not a bad idea to stop and consider the price we're paying for a ticket into the world of tomorrow.

The Convo is PCMag's interview series hosted by features editor Evan Dashevsky (@haldash). Each episode is broadcast live on PCMag's Facebook page, where viewers are invited to ask guests questions in the comments. Each episode is posted on our YouTube page and available as an audio podcast, which you can subscribe to on iTunes or the podcast platform of your choice.

Relax Chuck Klosterman on the Downside of Disruption stories

When Atari Ruled the World

ExtemeTech EIC Jamie Lendino dives into the history and lore of 8-bit Atari computers in 'Breakout: How Atari 8-Bit Computers Defined a Generation.' Read an excerpt here.

More stories