Navigating the Technological Tightrope Between Connection and Control

    Technology has become an inseparable part of our lives, shaping how we communicate, work, and understand the world around us. From the promise of a techno-utopia at the 1964 World's Fair to the unsettling techno-dystopia in the video “Are You Lost In The World Like Me,” the evolution of technology has brought both immense benefits and profound challenges. Are we in control of technology or is technology in control of us? It is a relationship that demands intentionality, balance, and awareness of the fine line between utility and exploitation.

Personal Data as a Commodity

    The ad-tech industry has turned personal data into its most valuable commodity, often without informed consent. This shift was made evident in a personal anecdote from Richard Stokes, a former advertising executive, who witnessed firsthand how companies extract deeply personal details (such as income, political preferences, and location) from unsuspecting users. With every post, click, and search, we have become the product.

    

    This commodification doesn’t stop with advertising. Platforms track our every move, manipulate what we see, and influence how we feel. I’ve watched the documentary The Social Dilemma numerous times and find it interesting how they illustrate that algorithms are designed to maximize engagement, often at the expense of mental health and autonomy. It paints a chilling picture of how social media platforms use our data to manipulate behavior, often leading to feelings of inadequacy, loneliness, or division. Watching it was both enlightening and unsettling, as it made me question whether we are using technology or if technology is using us.

A Personal Relationship With Technology

    My journey with technology has been one of cautious engagement. I refrained from getting Instagram until my sophomore year of high school, resisting the pressure from friends to join platforms like Snapchat or TikTok. Even now, despite my roles in organizations that may necessitate using TikTok, I’ve made an agreement with myself to restrict its use. This intentionality helps me maintain control over my relationship with technology.

    Social media has been both a source of inspiration and a source of distraction in my life. I’ve seen its power to motivate and teach. Some videos have provided life-changing insights at just the right moment, helping me make positive changes when I needed them most. Other times, it’s been a tool for procrastination. Yet, even in those moments, I’ve wondered: Is this simply procrastination, or is it a way to relieve stress? Maybe the key lies in reframing these interactions as a “secondary productivity,” not directly tackling my to-do list, but still benefiting my mental well-being.

    My digital footprint is relatively small because I’m cautious about what I share online. While I use Instagram to post some achievements or events, and LinkedIn to showcase academic and professional milestones, I avoid sharing personal details like my phone number and only share my email with trusted sites. Recently, I Googled myself and found some articles about me from high school. Although all positive, it reminded me to regularly check privacy settings. Even indirect information, like tagged photos or shared interests, can shape how I’m perceived, so I strive to keep my online presence aligned with my values.

Social Media’s Dual Impact

    The emotional impact of social media is undeniable. It can provoke thought, spark joy, or deepen sadness. A close friend of mine, during a difficult time, found solace in Instagram reels that resonated with his feelings. However, the platform’s algorithm continued feeding him similar content, keeping him in that depressive loop longer than he might have been otherwise. This is the paradox of social media: while it connects us to relatable experiences, it often amplifies the emotions we’re already feeling. This idea can also be seen in echo chambers that increase political polarization by reinforcing ones own beliefs.

    For me and many others, technology is also a lifeline. Calling my parents from college helps me stay connected, something that would have been far more challenging in a pre-digital age when letters were the primary form of communication. This ability to instantly connect is one of technology’s greatest gifts and one that I strive not to take for granted.

The Need for Intentionality

    Reflecting on my relationship with technology has led me to adopt a more intentional approach. Social media, when used thoughtfully, can be a tool for growth and connection. However, it requires setting boundaries and ensuring that time spent online is productive in some way, whether by learning something new, finding inspiration, or maintaining relationships.

    For example, during a pivotal moment in my life, I found motivation through social media to make meaningful changes. The content I consumed during that time encouraged me to act, and those moments of engagement were time well spent. This intentional use of technology can help us “wean off the addiction,” shifting our relationship with it from passive consumption to purposeful interaction.

The Plight of Man

    The YouTube video "MAN" by Steve Cutts offers a satirical yet thought-provoking perspective on humanity’s relationship with technology and progress. While its exaggerated characteristics initially seem laughable, watching it seriously left me reflecting on the nature of the world we’ve built. Are we using technology to enhance our lives, or are we harming the environment and heading towards a dystopia? The line between these two realities often feels blurred, and "MAN" serves as a reminder of the consequences of unchecked consumption.

Moving Forward

    As a society, we need to reevaluate our relationship with technology. This begins with demanding stronger privacy protections and transparency from tech companies. People should have the right to opt out of data collection without losing access to essential services. Governments must implement policies to protect users from invasive practices like shadow profiles or unnecessary location tracking (from businesses and in some cases from the government itself).

    Individually, we must strive for intentionality in how we engage with technology. This doesn’t mean abandoning it altogether, but rather using it in ways that add value to our lives. Whether through productive procrastination, staying connected with loved ones, or finding inspiration at just the right time, technology can be a force for good. That is if we choose to make it so.

    The future of our relationship with technology is still being written. By approaching it with awareness and intentionality, we can ensure it remains a tool for progress rather than a force of control.

Anti-War Voices? Never heard of them.

    I’ve always been fascinated by the way history repeats itself, especially when it comes to the struggle for free speech and dissent. The Progressive Era, fueled by World War I, was a time when antiwar voices faced intense persecution. It’s hard to imagine living in a country where simply speaking out against a war could land you in jail, but that was the reality for hundreds of Americans back then. These individuals were punished not for acts of violence or subversion, but simply for voicing their opinions. It makes me wonder: are we any better at protecting dissent today?

    Exploring websites like Antiwar.com and The American Conservative opened my eyes to the vibrant antiwar voices that exist today but are largely absent from mainstream media. I hadn’t even heard of these sites until recently. Why is that? Why do I, and many others, have to dig through obscure corners of the internet to hear perspectives that challenge U.S. military actions? These aren’t fringe ideas; they’re part of a critical conversation about the human, economic, and moral costs of war.

    The First Amendment is supposed to protect our right to dissent. It’s not just about letting people speak; it’s about ensuring that unpopular or minority opinions have a platform. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously described the “marketplace of ideas,” where truth emerges from the competition of ideas. But how can that marketplace function if certain voices are effectively silenced by algorithms, media gatekeeping, or societal pressure to conform?

    I spent some time on Antiwar.com, reading articles that challenged not just the “how” but the “why” of U.S. foreign interventions. The writers there don’t pull punches. They highlight the costs of war (human, economic, and moral) in ways that you rarely see on TV or social media. Similarly, The American Conservative takes a more right-leaning approach but still pushes back against the idea of endless wars. It’s striking to see such diverse voices aligned on the same issue.

Criticism of Russo-Ukrainian War on Social Media

    So why aren’t these voices amplified in mainstream spaces? Part of the problem may be indirect government influence. Historically, governments have suppressed dissenting voices during wartime, citing reasons like national security or public unity. For example, in Russia, the government has gone to great lengths to silence antiwar protests and voices opposing its actions in Ukraine. Independent media outlets have been shut down, protesters arrested, and social media platforms heavily monitored to ensure the state’s narrative dominates. While outright censorship like this is less common in democratic countries, similar dynamics can occur in subtler ways. 

    Close relationships between governments and major media outlets can shape coverage, while public relations campaigns drown out dissenting narratives. Also, social media algorithms (sometimes shaped by government input) tend to prioritize mainstream perspectives, making it harder to find alternative viewpoints. Surveillance and the fear of scrutiny can also create a chilling effect, leading individuals and organizations to self-censor. 

    Another part of the problem may be that dissent makes people uncomfortable. It challenges the narratives we’ve been taught to accept, especially when it comes to something as emotionally charged as war. But I believe dissent is necessary. It’s how we hold power accountable and ensure we’re making informed decisions. If we don’t hear these voices, how can we even question whether our government’s actions align with our values?

    The experience of seeking out these antiwar platforms has made me more aware of my own responsibility as a citizen. The First Amendment gives us the right to speak, but it also gives us the right to listen and to seek out perspectives that challenge us. It’s not always easy, and sometimes it’s uncomfortable, but it’s essential. If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that dissent isn’t just a right; it’s a duty. And if we want to live in a truly democratic society, we have to fight for a space where all voices, especially the unpopular ones, can be heard.