Anyone who has googled a simple question and sifted through pages of biased, promotional, or outright false blogs and articles in pursuit of a legitimate answer can affirm that "democratized access to publishing leads to so much crap that it's killing culture" (Rheingold). Rheingold explains that licensed publishing once proved a durable solution to this highly relatable issue, but is no longer affective or even relevant due to universalized web access. A new, reformed solution, he proposes, is teaching readers to recognize the differences between 'good' and 'bad' writing.

Summa bonum : the highest good, especially as the ultimate goal according to which values and priorities are established in an ethical system.

"...the summa bonum of educated life"

Clay Shirky uses this term in reference to a refined balance existing between media and its interpreters. This point plays directly into Rheingold's argument that we are currently in a period of media saturation and information over-exposure, and moreover that this is a phase in a historically repetitious cycle.

Although the young Walter Lippman was addressing an entirely different set of issues when he claimed "U.S. citizens are too gullible and ill informed to govern a modern, complex society" his statement still applies, to some degree, to twenty-first century America. It's a bit extreme to say Americans are incapable of governing a modern, complex society, but it is no exaggeration that gullibility and misinformation play a major part in modern American media. Without the prevalence of gullibility and misinformation, Russian propaganda would not have so easily penetrated American news feeds and likely would have had no influence on the 2016 presidential election.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/us/politics/russia-facebook-election.html

Rheingold spends a lot of time addressing and evaluating the issue of media-induced dissolving of sustained attention. Unlike many other writers such as Carr and Jackson who also recognize this issue, Rheingold goes a step farther to say something can be done in response. At this point in his argument, Rheingold moves away from simply stating, restating and restating again that human agency opens up the possibility for proactive behavior, and provides actual examples of possible actions that can be taken. An example of possible remedies he provides is teaching meditation practices and attention training in the home, classroom, or even workplace.

"Humans have agency."

This incredibly simple statement both condenses Rheingold's counterargument towards "technological determinism," and summarizes one of the major themes present in the reading. We may lose the capacity for sustained, focused attention. We may read in a nonlinear, scattered manner at the expense of depth and concentration. We may even substitute the web for personal memories. These affects, however, are not guaranteed, because humans have agency. Humans maintain the ability to observe new technologies, adapt to the environments created by them, and thrive.

In 1440, Johannes Gutenburg brought mechanical movable type printing to Renaissance Europe, introducing an era of mass communication which permanently altered the structure of society. Rheinburg, just as he did before with the invention of writing and the telephone, briefly exemplifies Gutenburg's media revolution to support his argument that, in response to a disruptive abundance of communications, a culture can choose to educate widely and benefit greatly. If Gutenbrug's 'printing press' managed to break the literate elites' monopoly on education and learning, spiking massive increases in literacy, what can we expect with the growing presence of the internet and worldwide web connectivity?

image from http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/

Rheingold continues to combat anti-internet hysteria, this time in defense of search engines. He brings up an interesting point that the machine's affordances, or properties that define its intended use, do not limit the way we use the mechanism. This point interests me because it not only serves as an effective counterargument to Carr's statements regarding search engines and hyperlinks, but also holds true to more situations than just the search engine instance. Yes, search engines reduce the online exploration process to a person's ability to recognize and input key words, but this does not debase the entire research process, rather accelerates it.

"...people were writing things about the telephone not unlike what people are writing about these technologies."

This quote from Claude Fischer shares a connection with a quote from Plato later in the reading regarding the invention of writing.

"...The fact is [writing] will produce forgetfullness in the souls of those who have learned it. They will not need to exercise their memories, being able to rely on what is written.. "

The underlying connection between these unique scenarios is an introduction of crucial new technologies into society. The internet, and more specifically social networking, serves as the third wave of revolutionary technologies in human social connection and society in the aggregate. With this new wave of revolutionary technology follows a new wave of perspectives and interpretations, many of which, as Rheingold acknowledges, take a harsh tone of forewarning. Where many critics may claim the internet and its properties are in the process of degrading human interaction and brain function, Rheingold takes a more proactive stance. He chooses not to isolate his focus on the situation, but instead ponders what can be done in response to the situation.

Rheingold examines the increasingly accessible web as a kind of new frontier that grants new opportunities and poses new threats. Directing his focus mainly at the affects of this new frontier on people's attention and ability to concentrate, the negative affects detailed by Rheingold are, for the most part, limited to distractions from goals and interpersonal relationships. The threats posed by this growing frontier, however, go far beyond social media addictions and poor parenthood.

Also taking advantage of growing web connections are terrorist groups such as ISIS. People with the potential to commit horrific acts that may not have otherwise been reached by these groups are now highly accessible via internet presence and social media profiles. J. M. Berger outlines the multi-step, online recruitment process used by terrorist groups

"...Isolation – Potential recruits are encouraged to cut ties with mainstream influences, such as their families, friends and local religious communities"

If oxytocin really is capable of being released via digital stimulus, it may be the active ingredient in the toxin that is online terrorist recruiting. Recruiters are capable of showing potential candidates support and understanding that candidates likely never experienced through relationships with family and friends.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/markaz/2015/11/09/how-terrorists-recruit-online-and-how-to-stop-it/

Rheingold uses this closing statement to transition out of the introductory portion of his argument, and into one of his argument's main themes: "[dealing] with distraction without filtering out opportunity."

Already covered at this point in his argument is the idea that the limitless nature of the internet presents new dualistic opportunities for learning/distraction. Reihngold employs anecdotes regarding attention and distraction, as well as examples of neurological studies to subtly develop his response to this growing issue. With this selection from the reading, Reihngold explicitly summarizes his response that the benefits and harms of internet are not inevitable factors that affect the internet's users, but are instead harnessable and avoidable.