| This article really isn't saying attention span is getting shorter ( or it's misunderstanding what "attention span" means ). It's that global interest timeframe is getting shorter ( aka how long a product or news is relevant is shrinking because we are getting more product, news, etc ). "The authors evaluated a total of 43 billion tweets and analyzed the top 50 trending hashtags in the world every hour on the hour, from 2013 to 2016. They then calculated the time the hashtags remained popular and found that in 2013, a hashtag remained in the top 50 list for an average of 17.5 hours, but the figure had dropped to 11.9 hours by 2016." This doesn't mean that attention span is shrinking. It just means that there are tons more tweets and hashtags in 2016 as there are in 2013. Just like with movies, the article mentioned. It has nothing to do with "attention span" since Endgame is a 3 hour long film. It just means that the movie industry is producing a lot more movies/blockbusters and the time a blockbluster can stay at the top is limited because another blockbuster is bound to release soon after. It's like in the past we only had the "classics" as college subjects. Now we have physics, biology, chemistry, computer science, etc. And the new subjects means that our attention span got shorter. Which is absurd. I think human attention span got shorter, but the article isn't really arguing that or it isn't arguing it well. And I'm not sure if human attention span getting shorter is necessarily a bad thing. Why sit through commercials, intros and so much filler/fluff in most media? As long as you are able to concentrate on things that deserve concentration, nothing wrong with short attention span for fluff. |
So why is so much being written and thought and discussed about whats really just the rampant spam of maybe 2% of Americans? Probably because twitter has a ticker.