Living in the Information Age, we have endless knowledge and opportunities to learn literally at our fingertips. There are countless things we can explore, viewpoints we can dissect, and topics we can study without ever acquiring a university degree. Everyone with internet access has the ability to read or watch virtually anything – so why does it feel like this hasn’t been taken advantage of to the fullest? Though this is, of course, primarily anecdotal, I have noticed online discourse about popular media or political topics where it seems half the contributors understood the message a piece of media is attempting to convey, while the other half took 100% of it at face value without any deeper thoughts on the subject matter. There are two popular pieces of media that come to mind for me here: the show Adolescence and book A Little Life. Both online and offline I have had conversations about these pieces of media and been faced with surface level understandings – or in some cases complete misunderstandings – about the show or book. Here, I propose the question: do we actually understand the media we consume, and are we able to think critically about it?
I’ll start off with discussing A Little Life. This isn’t a critique of the book itself necessarily, but rather about the discourse around it. A few years ago, the book began showing up everywhere on TikTok and Instagram, accompanied by videos of readers sobbing over the distressing content of the book and the utter despair the main character Jude feels. It truly is a piece of incredibly depressing work, full of themes such as child abuse and sexual assault. One thing about the popularity of the book and discussions about it that bothered me was how little the author was brought up. See, Hanya Yanagihara has faced backlash before for her depictions of brutal acts of assault against gay men in this novel as well as her earlier novel The People in the Trees. I highly recommend reading Andrea Long Chu’s article “Hanya’s Boys” for some further insight into these critiques. In 2022 when the book was trending all over social media, something about the creators’ reactions to the book made me feel… uncomfortable. The recordings of people sobbing over the book and Jude’s trauma felt superficial, almost like a ploy to get views and keep up with online discussion. Now, I am not saying that every single person discussing this book is exaggerating their reactions to the book – the content is intended to stir an emotional reaction and may be triggering for many people reading it. What I am saying however, is that its trendiness seemed to rely on it being so inflammatory and discussions were centered on reactions to the events taking place, but not the implications of these things in real life. With themes as heavy as those within the novel, one would hope to see online creators taking the opportunity to share resources for victims of abuse, or perhaps advocate for listening to real life survivors. Instead, it came across as hawking the book as a dose of trauma porn – then when you’re done, you can put it down and move on. The point I want to make here is that consuming a piece of media with themes as serious as this without considering the real life implications of them detracts from the experience: reading something and then just moving along without a deeper dive into the content, author, and surrounding discourse isn’t a productive way to consume media. There is plenty more I could discuss when it comes to this book and its reception, but my bottom line on it is this: we need to be conscious about what we consume, and consider why we feel drawn to it.
The recently released Netflix show Adolescence and the surrounding discourse made me feel a bit differently about media consumption: spoilers for the show incoming. The show follows the fallout of the murder of a teenage girl at the hands of her younger male classmate from the perspective of the police, a psychologist, and the boy’s family. It is an incredibly emotional look at the factors contributing to his mindset and the societal issues that underlie the ‘red pill’ movement amongst young men. There are definitely issues with the show that should be discussed, but a common sentiment about the show I saw online was ‘they didn’t explain what happened or why well enough’. Many viewers were expecting a traditional crime drama, following the grisly details of the murder and the court proceedings of a sensitive case, but the show turns away from this in favour of exploring themes of generational cycles of patriarchy, the reach of incel culture, and the challenges schools and parents face in keeping up with the internet and the accessibility of problematic content. This is why it is mind boggling that some found the show to be confusing or that it didn’t explain the plotline clearly. Of course watching TV can be an opportunity to turn off our brains for a bit and watch something without needing to think deeply – but the expectation for media to hand-hold and explain everything to the viewer is indicative of a larger issue I have witnessed. Lacking the skills for critical analysis, and worse, not caring that one does, has become a societal issue. The expectation that movies, shows, or books should map out its underlying messages demonstrates the decline in appreciation for artists and their work that is underscored by AI and misinformation in the 21st century.
I promise this is all connected. See, the advent and now widespread use of AI for creating ‘art’ or writing essays is indicative of losing the desire to learn. Personally, I have seen online and heard in person accounts of students saying they use ChatGTP for 500 word essays or to provide a synopsis of their current English class book assignment. Generative AI is used to make ‘art’ in the style of Picasso or Van Gogh. In doing so however, we lose the ability to appreciate real art made over dozens of hours and the ability to consider the nuances of classic novels. Being able to read a novel, connect with the message, think about it and discuss it with others, and formulate our own thoughts on it is a beautiful thing. This is not to say that everyone must read War and Peace and explain it in an academic setting – reading anything and being able to critically assess it is a skill anyone can build.
This is connected to politics and misinformation as well. Becoming comfortable taking all media at face value extends to taking in news on current events. Misinformation is everywhere, and it can be hard to recognise. But not having the skills or desire to think critically about politics or the news that comes up on our feeds is in a way more harmful than the content itself. We must be able to explore all perspectives, get our information from different sources, and endeavor to understand as much as we can about the world around us. Our opinions shouldn’t be reliant on what we believe will get a reaction from others, like the case of A Little Life discourse, or dependent on everything being spelled out, like Adolescence discourse. Complacency benefits no one, and it certainly doesn’t make change. No matter what you believe, making efforts to learn, grow, and explore is crucial to become an informed member of society. It all starts at a young age – English classes don’t assign a book for no reason, but to encourage building critical skills. We have the resources to discuss a piece of media or a current event with anyone in the world through the internet – we don’t have to contain ourselves within a bubble or passively consume.
I know this article may be a little cynical, but this isn’t an attempt to tear down younger generations, including my own. After all, while our generation has been reliant on social media for our news, especially in the form of short video clips often lacking sources, older generations have faced the problem of persistent fake news and AI content. The inability or lack of willingness to think critically about media is not unique to Gen Z or Gen Alpha, but it may become an even worse problem in the future if we continue to be content with this.
The issue is more nuanced than I can afford to fit in this article. I’ve highlighted two pieces of media and the discourse around them that have been on my mind recently, but of course there are better examples illustrating this and far more in depth conversations to be had about the effects of this. My point is this: we must endeavor to consciously consume content, build skills to critique what we consume, and then apply this to our real lives. Being content with absorbing media passively, taking a headline at face value, or equating AI artwork with real, laborious artwork won’t make our world a better place. It’s not just the lack of critical analysis of media, but the further reaching consequences of this for formulating political opinions and becoming a more knowledge generation.