Day 14: Reclamation

I am really enjoying Williams' book. I think he addresses valuable points of thought but puts it in ways that are a bit easier to understand and process.

In his section of chapters titled "Freedom of Attention" we explore the topics of: The "fierce competition for human attention" influenced by technology, our behaviors in different environments and how technology plays a part in that, and how we can assert our freedom of attention.

From Chapter 10, "The Ground of First Struggle", we explore the topic of technology distracting from human interaction. He points out that these distractions have become more of annoyances than actual problems. I think that's because it has been so normalized to have a conversation with someone while they have a cellphone to their face or in their hand so when it does happen it isn't unheard of and it isn't a new experience. He expresses that it seems we can't fully admit how we actually want to be distracted. I thought this was an interesting point to make. Before this class I'm not sure I would have admitted that I specifically get on my phone to distract me but in just typing up this post I have found myself reaching for my phone and clicking on any app to avoid typing anymore. So, I decided to leave my phone in the other room while I finish up to eliminate that option. I think we can all agree this isn't even something we are aware of. We wake up in the morning, check our phone and scroll through social media and before you know it 30 minutes have passed.
Williams argues that this is political in two ways. "First, because our media are the lens through which we understand and engage with those matters we have historically understood as "political". Second, because they are now the lens through which we view everything, including ourselves."
He continues to bring light to how reliant we are on computers and discussed devices such as the amazon echo and google home. These all "help" people by becoming part of their home. He predicts that these models will advance and people will question their design. But people already have. I frequently wonder how much these devices are listening and have heard stories of them recording and sending private conversations. So as a shorter summary this chapter is essentially saying the goal of creators isn't to distract despite that being what happens but they are a business and they are fueled by our purchases and we continue to give in.

The biggest take aways from this reading come from chapter 12 & 13.

In chapter 12 he starts by asking if there is a point of no return for human attention. While I'm not sure if we still have that option Williams gives a few different ways we can get attention back. For this book he touches on "(a) rethinking the nature and purpose of advertising, (b) conceptual and linguistic reengineering, (c) changing the upstream determinants of design, and (d) advancing mechanisms for account- ability, transparency, and measurement."
In regards to advertising he makes a great point that it's hard to say what advertising is for when we don't even know what advertising is. Although I think we can agree it is us who fuels advertising through our interactions. We are constantly exposed to ads everywhere we go. Think about it, everywhere. Our first step for freedom of attention would be to have freedom of ad blocking. While we have that option on social media through blocking paid ads, you still have the exposure through billboards and through other people so that is not a freedom we yet posses.

The final big point I would like to discuss is the topic of "Designer's Oath". Williams recognizes it will be difficult to implement but we can conclude this oath wouldn't be legally binding. He states, "

It could be suggested that “design’ is a level of abstraction too broad for such an oath because different domains of design, whether architecture or software engineering or advertising, face different challenges and may prioritize different values.". Williams creates a version of the oath that I feel covers a lot of ground and would be effective if applied. 

"As someone who shapes the lives of others, I promise to:

Care genuinely about their success;

Understand their intentions, goals, and values as completely as possible;

Align my projects and actions with their intentions, goals, and values;

Respect their dignity, attention, and freedom, and never use their own weaknesses against them;

Measure the full effect of my projects on their lives, and not just those effects that are important to me;

Communicate clearly, honestly, and frequently my intentions and methods; and

Promote their ability to direct their own lives by encouraging reflection on their own values, goals, and intentions"

The risk with this is obviously that someone will break this promise. Williams admits that he knows people will think his ideas are too ambitious, too idealistic, and too utopian. And I have to admit I am one of those people. I don't think we can ever achieve not having distractions form technology and I don't think the Designer's Oath would be upheld which is a risk you run with any oath. As a society and a democracy I feel that we are too far from a utopia for this to even be an option... what do you think?