CSotD: TikTok TechTalk
Skip to comments
Can’t steal the pun without crediting the punster, and it’s also worth pointing out that Dan Thompson had to have drawn this before the court decision came down and extend him some kudos for that, as well, though the trial took five weeks, so there was plenty of time to jump aboard.
The YouTube lawyer explained that “This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” which is like saying that a Tiparillo is neither a cigarette nor a cigar: A distinction without a difference.
As Cohen suggests, they really need to come up with some more compelling arguments as they head into appeals, because bickering over definitions isn’t gonna cut it.
Bennett pulls out the big guns, comparing allowing a child to play with a Smartphone to letting her play with matches. The sentiment is reminiscent of the famous Daisy commercial of 1964, which only aired once, but got so much publicity that it might as well have run for a full schedule.
Kids of all types and races have been subject to social media, but a tiny barefooted blonde pings all the right receptors to make the cartoon doubly effective.
Ramirez goes the opposite direction, and places his addict on Skid Row. One flaw here is that it isn’t simply an issue of the lower class, but this imagery suggests that it’s somebody else’s problem.
The other criticism is that it’s so outlandish that you can’t tell if he’s agreeing with the verdict or mocking it.
Outlandish is an acceptable strategy, but it needs to be completely outlandish, as in del Rosso’s cartoon, which is drawn in such a Twilight Zone/Outer Limits way that it declares itself absurd but then forces you to confront the reality behind it.
Similarly, Schrank melds quicksand with sandboxes with a phone to create the image of a child sucked in by the “Dangerous Algorithms” that were revealed in the course of the trial.
It’s not just that social media is attractive, but the architects of social media purposefully and consciously programmed in specific elements to make it addictive, at which point we re-open the old arguments about “physical addiction” and “psychological addiction,” which are generally advanced by people who make their money through promoting psychologically addictive substances.
Mauldin defended marijuana half a century ago, since it isn’t physically addictive. However, the argument for legalization often began, “But you drink alcohol …” the answer to which was “If alcohol were discovered today, it wouldn’t be legal either.”
The issue of tobacco dependency could be argued far into the night, but it was generally accepted, even before the explosion of incriminating documents, that promoting tobacco to minors should be — but wasn’t — banned.
Sluka puts responsibility on the enablers, and cites social media’s frequent role as the “nanny,” knowing that a lot of kids’ parents use technology as a babysitter.
Then he adds “the friend,” which is how technology use advances with the child’s age, but is also applicable to a variety of unwanted influences: What parents control or forbid at home becomes a quick fix at a friend’s house, to which I would add that, even if you could somehow shelter your child from any of it, they’d still be going to school with kids who were steeped in the culture you had hoped to avoid.
Then Sluka turns to technology as educator, which applies both to what kids may learn — for better or worse — surfing around on their own, but also to tech in schools.
When cell phones first became popular, individual teachers and a few schools tried to ban them during class, but it’s only recently that states have enacted no-phone laws. This seems as self-evident as banning alcohol in class, but somehow it wasn’t.
Now some schools are backing off on other technology as well, limiting computers to situations in which they are relevant.
Meanwhile, the phone is waiting, calling out for attention. However much it may be controlled in school, and even if parents confiscate it at bedtime, it’s still there, demanding attention and promising sweet relief from boredom, from pain, from reality.
Just a little taste. I can quit anytime.
Juxtaposition of the Day
An interesting pairing of an identical concept. I like Gouders’ version because the dealer is more sinister, and the shadowy figure beside him offers a suggestion of prowling in search of a fix. On the other hand, Jennings makes it more clear that he’s selling drugs and not stolen merchandise, and if he’s less menacing, the dollar signs in his eye belie the friendly expression.
In any case, I doubt either cartoon will wind up framed and hanging in Zuckerberg’s office.
Nor will Emmerson’s cartoon please its subject, though perhaps there will come a point in time where he’ll be happy to hide behind an “Oops,” as if it were all just a mistake, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that change of heart.
Perhaps there will be an “Oops” over the revelation of documents that made it clear he acted intentionally to draw kids into social media and make it irresistible to them.
And in the “One in Every Crowd” category, there is, of course, always the observer who finds nothing wrong with harming young people, denies the harm even exists, and dismisses it all as a money grab. My response is, first of all, “Tell me you didn’t sit through the trial without telling me you didn’t sit through the trial.”
Obviously, five weeks of evidence and several days of jury deliberation suggest that there was something to the case. I’ve sat on a jury and seen the way both prosecution and defense are constructed.
However, I think the relevant question here is the same as Joseph Welch asked: “Have you no sense of decency?” This is a level of cynical cold-heartedness I cannot comprehend.
Fortunately, Turner employs good old Irish dark humor to let us finish today with a laugh.
As least, I think it’s intended as humor. Made me laugh, anyway.
Mike Peterson has posted his "Comic Strip of the Day" column every day since 2010. His opinions are his own, but we welcome comments either agreeing or in opposition.
Comments 14
Comments are closed.