iMe

There's a very good counter-argument to this article from The Times but the observations aren't new, and I'm not unsympathetic to them. But I like a challenge so I'll think of a suitable riposte later. In the meantime, here's the gist of the article, which starts as a critique of the 'fact' that everyone in the US (including the author) now wander round in a white earbud-induced cocoon:

"Walk through any airport in the United States these days and you will see person after person gliding through the social ether as if on autopilot. Get on a subway and you're surrounded by a bunch of Stepford commuters staring into mid-space as if anaesthetised by technology. Don't ask, don't tell, don't overhear, don't observe. Just tune in and tune out.
It wouldn't be so worrying if it weren't part of something even bigger. Americans are beginning to narrow their lives.

You get your news from your favourite blogs, the ones that won't challenge your view of the world. You tune into a satellite radio service that also aims directly at a small market - for new age fanatics, liberal talk or Christian rock. Television is all cable. Culture is all subculture. Your cell phones can receive e-mail feeds of your favourite blogger's latest thoughts - seconds after he has posted them - get sports scores for your team or stock quotes of your portfolio.
Technology has given us a universe entirely for ourselves - where the serendipity of meeting a new stranger, hearing a piece of music we would never choose for ourselves or an opinion that might force us to change our mind about something are all effectively banished.
Atomisation by little white boxes and cell phones. Society without the social. Others who are chosen - not met at random."