12/28: Wiping the Slate Clean … New Year’s Resolutions

Nearly half of all Americans — 48% — say they are at least somewhat likely to make a New Year’s resolution this year.  52%, on the other hand, report it is not very likely at all.

The proportion of residents nationally who plan to wipe the slate clean has grown since last year.  When Marist last asked Americans about New Year’s resolutions at this time in 2008, 40% said they were either somewhat likely or very likely to make a resolution.

Click Here for Complete December 28, 2009 USA Poll Release and Tables

There has been a change among men on this question.  A majority of men — 53% — report they are at least somewhat likely to make a New Year’s resolution.  Last year, 37% of men said they were planning to alter their habits.  Women are consistent.  44% of women currently say they are going to make a change in 2010.  The same proportion — 44% — made that pledge last year.

Looking at age, younger Americans are more likely to change their lifestyle compared with their elders.  60% of residents under the age of 45 say they are somewhat or very likely to make a resolution.  40% of those 45 and older believe they will do the same.  In Marist’s 2008 poll about New Year’s resolutions, 55% of Americans younger than 45 years of age reported they were likely to make a vow to change while 29% of their elder counterparts said they were going to make the same promise.

Table: Likelihood of Making Resolution

Weight Loss Tips Scale of New Year’s Resolutions

Americans have health on their minds heading into 2010.  The number-one New Year’s resolution is weight loss.  19% of residents who are likely to make a resolution vow to shed those extra pounds next year, and 12% plan to stop smoking.  10% say they want to exercise more. Other leading lifestyle changes include being a better person (9%) and getting a better job (8%).

Although weight loss tops the list of resolutions for both men and women who are resolved to make a change in the New Year, more women than men plan to fight the battle of the bulge.  More than one-fifth of women — 22% — and 16% of men want to shed those extra pounds.

Older Americans reflect the top resolution of the overall population.  About a quarter of residents age 45 or older who say they will likely make a resolution promise to lose weight.  However, there is little agreement among their younger counterparts.  14% in this age group say they want to lose weight.  13% want to stop smoking, 12% resolve to get a better job, and 10% of these residents want to exercise more.  7% would like to be a better person.

Table: Top New Year’s Resolutions
Table: Complete List of New Year’s Resolutions

Keeping Their Word?

33% of Americans recall making a New Year’s resolution last year, but how successful were they?  Of those residents, 65% said they kept their promise for at least part of the year while 35% did not.  Men were more steadfast than were women.  70% of men kept their resolution for at least part of 2009.  This compares with 59% of women.

Dedication has grown among Americans who have previously made a resolution.  While 65% of residents kept their resolution for 2009, 60% did so in 2008.

Table: Made Resolution Last Year
Table: Kept 2009 Resolution?

Optimism Among Americans Grows

Looking ahead to the next decade, more than six in ten Americans have a positive outlook about the future.  63% say they are more optimistic heading into 2010 while 34% say they are more pessimistic.  When Marist last asked this question in December 2008, 56% of residents had a positive outlook toward the future.  40%, however, had a more dismal view.

Although men and women maintain a similar outlook about the future, optimism among men has grown.  Currently, 65% of women and 61% of men believe the future is a bright one.  Last year, 62% of women and 50% of men thought that way.

Younger Americans are also more positive about the future compared with their elders.  72% of those under 45 years old are optimistic about 2010 compared with 57% of those 45 and older.  A year ago, 64% of those under 45 and 52% of those who are older held a positive outlook for the year to come.

Table: Optimism for the Future

Marist Poll Methodology

Related Stories:

2008 New Year’s Tables

12/22: “It’s a Wonderful Life” Favorite Holiday Movie

It’s a holiday tradition, and for the second year, Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life takes the top spot in The Marist Poll’s holiday movie survey.  26% of Americans say Capra’s classic is their favorite holiday movie while A Christmas Story is preferred by 21% of Americans. 18% “believe” and rank Miracle on 34th Street their number-one holiday flick. 14% wait all year for Bing Crosby and Rosemary Clooney to grace the screen in White Christmas.  And, the same proportion — 14% — are pleasantly haunted by Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

When Marist asked about Americans’ favorite holiday movies last December, It’s a Wonderful Life placed first, A Christmas Story came in second, and Miracle on 34th Street rounded out the top three.  White Christmas took the fourth slot, and A Christmas Carol and Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer tied for fifth place.

Holiday movie preferences are affected by age.  Americans 18 to 44 years old currently think A Christmas Story is the ultimate holiday movie.  31% of those 18 to 29 believe this to be the case as do 34% of those 30 to 44.  Residents 45 to 59 align with the overall population.  37% of those in this age group rank It’s a Wonderful Life to be the top Christmas movie.  Americans 60 and older divide.  27% within this age bracket say White Christmas takes top honors while 25% believe It’s a Wonderful Life reigns supreme.

Table: Favorite Holiday Movie

‘Toon Time: Rudolph and Charlie Brown Fan Favorites

When it comes to animated holiday movies, two favorites tie for the number-one spot.  Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer and A Charlie Brown Christmas each receive 26% of Americans’ vote.  How the Grinch Stole Christmas is the favorite of 25% of residents. 11% prefer Frosty the Snowman, and 6% most enjoy Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town.

Rudolph better watch out, because Charlie Brown has come from behind!  When Marist last asked about favorite animated Christmas movies last December, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer was favored while A Charlie Brown Christmas came in second.  How the Grinch Stole Christmas remains in the number-three slot.  Last year, Frosty the Snowman followed in fourth and Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town slid into the number five spot.

Table: Favorite Animated Holiday Movie

Marist Poll Methodology

Related Stories:

2008 Holiday Movie Tables

12/21: Re-Gifting Practiced by More Than One-Fifth of Americans

There’s a good chance this holiday season that the present you unwrap is the gift that keeps on giving.  Although 77% of U.S. residents say they do not re-gift holiday presents, a notable proportion – 23% — have no problem giving a gift that they’ve received to someone else.

There is an age gap on this question.  Younger Americans are more likely to re-gift holiday presents.  36% of those 18 to 29 years old pass along a previous present while 27% of those 30 to 44 admit to doing the same.  Nearly one-fifth of Americans age 45 to 59 re-gift as do 17% of those 60 and older.

The practice also occurs more frequently in the Northeast than in other parts of the country.  Four in ten residents in the Northeast re-gift compared with 20% in the South, 20% in the West, and 17% in the Midwest.

Table: Do You Re-Gift?

Wine Tops List of Re-Gifted Gifts

Be wary the next time someone wraps up a bottle of wine and gives it to you as a gift!  27% of residents nationally report wine to be the item they’d most likely re-gift.  22% would re-wrap that festive fruitcake, and 18% say a candle would top their list of gifts to re-purpose.  A glass dish and candy receive 15% and 11%, respectively.

Table: Most Re-Gifted Present

Marist Poll Methodology

Related Stories:

12/21: Traffic Rated #1 Holiday Hassle

12/21: Traffic Rated #1 Holiday Hassle

Do the holidays give you a great big headache?  You aren’t alone!  The holiday season has its fair share of hassles.

The biggest – traffic.  32% of U.S. residents report that traffic is the biggest nuisance during the holiday season.  Long lines and rude shoppers are tied for a distant second with 18% each.  Unhelpful salespeople frustrate 9% of Americans while 8% are discouraged by finding hard to get gifts.  During the holiday season, unruly children annoy 7% of the population.

Men are more put off by holiday traffic than are women.  37% of men are irritated by traffic jams compared with 27% of women.

Table: Holiday Hassles

Marist Poll Methodology

12/21: Re-Gifting Practiced by More Than One-Fifth of Americans

12/18: The Twitter “Craze:” Not So Much

A few months ago, you may have thought Twitter was taking over the country, but that doesn’t appear to be the case.  A recent national, Marist poll found only 8% of U.S. residents have accounts with the social networking site.  When Marist last conducted a poll on Twitter use in June, 6% of U.S. residents reported having an account.

Not surprisingly, if you’re younger, you’re more likely to be a member of the Twitterati.  15% of Americans 18 to 29 and 13% of those 30 to 44 report they tweet.  This is compared with 6% of residents 45 to 59 and 3% of those 60 or older.  The proportion of younger Americans who use Twitter has grown since Marist last asked about Twitter use in June.  Use by older Americans is little changed.

Table: Have Twitter Account?

Marist Poll Methodology

Related Stories:

12/18: Social Networks Grow in Popularity Among U.S. Residents

12/18: Technology’s Impact on Relationships

The Future of Technology and Journalism

This Is Your Brain on Social Networks … Any Questions?

12/18: Social Networks Grow in Popularity Among U.S. Residents

Social networks such as Facebook, MySpace, and LinkedIn have yet to convince the majority of U.S. residents to sign up, but if a recent national Marist Poll on the topic is any indication, it’s only a matter of time before they do.

The survey found that 41% of U.S. residents have a profile on a social networking site, a 9 percentage point jump since Marist last asked about social networking in June.

Notably, the social networking generation gap may be shrinking.   Although those under age 45 still outnumber the proportion of older Americans who stay connected online, more Americans age 45 and older have discovered the interactive joys of trading witticisms, sharing photos, and swapping links.  23% of people in that age group now report having an account compared with 14% when Marist last asked this question in June.

Growth continues for people under 45, as well.  65% of residents under 45 years old say they have a social networking profile while 59% said the same in the last poll.

Americans who are employed are also more likely to appreciate the advantages social networking affords. Nearly half — 48% — of people with a job have a profile compared with only three in ten adults who are not working.

When it comes to having a social networking profile, women are more likely to connect with family, friends, and colleagues online.  45% of women report they have profiles, and 36% of men say the same.

Table: Have a Social Networking Profile

Relationships and Social Networking

The substantial increase may be explained by the general perception that social networks are a good way to strengthen connections to friends and family.  68% of U.S. residents with profiles say the sites help their personal relationships while 12% say they hurt them.  20% are unsure.

Age is also a factor on this question.  More younger Americans with a social networking profile think using this form of communication helps relationships compared with those who are older.  71% of those under age 45 think this is the case compared with 63% who are 45 and older.

Table: Social Networking’s Impact on Relationships

Marist Poll Methodology

Related Stories:

12/18: The Twitter “Craze:” Not So Much

12/18: Technology’s Impact on Relationships

The Future of Technology and Journalism

This Is Your Brain on Social Networks … Any Questions?

12/18: Technology’s Impact on Relationships

While cell phones, the Internet, mobile devices and other high-tech gadgets have made it possible to reach out to people in new and exciting ways, the majority of U.S. residents say technology makes no difference in their personal relationships.  56% of people nationally say technology neither worsens nor improves their personal ties.

However,  38% say it makes their personal relationships better while 6% say it makes them worse.  Here, there has been a slight change since Marist’s previous poll.  In June, 30% reported that technology improves their personal relationships.

As one might expect, age plays a role when it comes to this subject.  Younger people are more likely to say technology makes an impact – and a positive one at that.  Among U.S. residents under 45 years old, 47% say technology improves their relationships, 7% think it hurts them, and 46% believe it makes no difference.  Among residents 45 and older, 33% say technology improves their relationships, 5% report it makes them worse, and 63% say it has no impact.

Table: Technology/Personal Relationships

Technology and Jobs

While results are mixed when it comes to technology and social life, residents are overwhelmingly grateful for their computers, mobile devices and other gadgets in the workplace.  82% of employed U.S. residents say technology makes their jobs at work better, 1% report it makes their jobs worse, and 17% don’t think it makes a difference.  Compared with Marist’s June survey on the subject, more Americans believe technology makes their work life better.

Table: Technology/Job at Work

Marist Poll Methodology

Related Stories:

12/18: The Twitter “Craze:” Not So Much

12/18: Social Networks Grow in Popularity Among U.S. Residents

The Future of Technology and Journalism

This Is Your Brain on Social Networks … Any Questions?

The Future of Technology and Journalism

Sree Sreenivasan is the Dean of Student Affairs at the Columbia University School of Journalism and a contributing editor to DNAinfo. In an interview with the Marist Poll’s John Sparks, Sreenivasan discusses the advent of social networking, training journalists so that they’re equipped for the digital world, and why blogs and traditional news sites can coexist.

Listen to the Interview, Part 1:

John Sparks
Sree, the Marist Institute recently conducted a poll on technology.  We asked U.S. residents if they had a profile on the social networking site like MySpace, Facebook, or LinkedIn.  59% of the American public said, “No, they did not.”  Do you think that more folks will in the future?

Sree Sreenivasan
I believe you’ll see many more people joining social networking websites as they understand the value of it.  I teach in my classes that this is radio in 1912. This is TV in 1950.  And it’d be as if we were polling at that time, and as we know, television would evolve in a hundred different ways after that, and I imagine the same amount of changes that we’ve seen in TV in the last half a century, we’re going to see in the next few years in social media.

John Sparks
One thing that we hear a lot about these days is Twitter, and the Marist Institute also asked folks if they personally had a Twitter account.

Sree Sreenivasan
I can’t wait to hear this answer.

John Sparks
92% said “No.”  Does that say that most Americans think it’s absurd to share their every waking minute with the rest of the world, or do they just not understand what a Twitter account really is?

Sree Sreenivasan
It might be a combination of both.  And it would… If they… I don’t know if you asked also how many people considered having one and decided not to have it, or how many have actually heard of Twitter itself as opposed to actually have an account.  Twitter, again, this is so early in its days that I remember many of the conversations that we had about email, where you had about faxes, we had about Web sites. One of my really good friends, I said, “You must have a Web site.”  And he said, “Are you kidding? Who’s going to care what I’ve done? And why would I need a profile on the Web?”  And now he loves his Web site so … and this is the… even other people I know who hated the idea of using email because they loved writing, now can’t get — can’t stop sending me email. So this is all slow processes. People understand what is going — what is worth their time and energy and what is not.  We should also keep in mind that I’m — and when we teach, we don’t focus on specific tools or specific companies. People ask me: “Is Twitter going to be here for the next 20 years?”  I said, “I don’t know. If I knew that, I’d be a good predictor or person able to predict things.” But what I do know is the idea of this micro blogging, which is what Twitter does, is going to be around for a long time.

John Sparks
You know one thing we read a lot about and hear a lot about concerns technology and personal relationships. We asked if technology made those personal relationships better or worse, and 38% of the respondents said it improved their personal relationships, 6% said no, but more than half, 56%, said that it made no difference.  Do you think … what kind of effect do you think technology has on personal relationships?

Listen to Part 2:

Sree Sreenivasan
I’m sorry to kind of come back to you with a question, but …

John Sparks
Sure.

Sree Sreenivasan
Was this people who already had accounts or people who … were these people who had said, “Yes, they have a Facebook account or …”

John Sparks
Did not distinguish in this instance.

Sree Sreenivasan
Ah okay.  So I guess your question was: Has technology affected people’s lives or their relationships?

John Sparks
Yeah, their personal relationships.

Sree Sreenivasan
I think that the rise of email, social media, Facebook has had a tremendous impact on the lives, everyday lives of people. It depends on folks who have access to the technology. Right here in New York, we have a lot of people who are off the grid, so to speak, because they have a lot of other issues in their lives that they need to deal with rather than are they digital haves.  You know, the conversation about digital haves or have-nots with the digital divide. But among the people who are online, I’m a big believer that all this technology has had an impact. Imagine how many more people are able to share the photograph of their children with their — with the grandparents in a way that they couldn’t before or imagine how much of an impact this kind of media has had on keeping in touch with family members, with friends from high school, et cetera.  Now just because I can keep in touch with everybody from high school doesn’t mean I want to keep in touch with everybody from high school, but that general sense of kind of tremendous impact that this has had, and I can give you a couple of examples if we have the time.

John Sparks
Sure.

Sree Sreenivasan
And one is that I went to give a talk to Columbia Alumni in Naples, Florida, and this was a room filled with people, be fair to say about the age of 70. These were retired folks, most of them. And they were all there either because they were already on Facebook or curious about it because they want to use it to keep in touch with their friends and family, and I always understood that the problem about Facebook was teenagers and people in their 20′s worried that their mothers want to be their friends on Facebook. But at this event, a lady in her 70′s said that she was newly single and was worried about her daughter, her daughter, keeping tabs on her via Facebook.  And so when you think that this is something that’s always … I always thought it went up as a problem in terms of generation, but here was a 70-something worried about the 40-something keeping tabs on her. So this is where we’re kind of seeing a change in how people deal with information, how they’re interacting, how they’re sharing.  But it’s still early, and we’re going to continue to watch that evolve.

John Sparks
Do you think the technology has helped us to become more socially adept or do you think it’s isolated us into our own little worlds?

Listen to Part 3:

Sree Sreenivasan
Right. So you should know that I am a technology evangelist with a lower case “e,” but I’m also a skeptic.  So obviously you know my bias is I’m pro technology. I believe technology in the long run makes things cheaper, better, faster. That doesn’t mean it does that to every single thing and doesn’t mean that you can’t get isolated, as we’ve seen with some of this technology.  We’ve seen people addicted in a way that they — at the expense of everything else, they spend their time doing whatever it is online.  But at the same time, I can give you any number of stories about how people have been affected in a positive way.  And we should also acknowledge that journalists like stories of problems rather than kind of grandma connects with young grandson over email and they’re sharing his homework projects. They’re doing homework together on the Internet.  Boring story.  Young kid allegedly cyber-stalked and bullied by someone online story, that’s part of kind of journalism in itself and how it looks, unfortunately, at the news.  And despite all the bad news you see about technology on the front page of the paper or on TV, I believe that the vast majority of the Internet is at worst kind of harmless, or it’s not a problem. But of course there are pockets of problems, and people should really be vigilant, skeptical, careful, but that’s not the message that the media sends out.

John Sparks
You teach journalism at Columbia. I teach journalism at the University of North Texas. Convergence is — some people say it’s the future. I say it’s the present. But I’m just curious, are you teaching technology, or do you concentrate on technique in using that technology?

Listen to Part 4:

Sree Sreenivasan
I tell students that we have to teach — that they have — journalists need to learn two things: New Media or digital media skill set. They need to have a digital media skill set and a digital media mindset, and anybody can teach you the skill set. Your 12-year-old nephew can teach you that or niece can you teach that. But what we — you need is that mindset so you understand how to deal with technology and how to use it and how to respond to the kind of upheaval that it’s causing all around us, and that’s not something … because I’m not going to be there to help them push the buttons the rest of their life.  But you and I as teachers if we can teach them to think about technology, understand what works and what doesn’t, how to be both evangelist and the skeptic, I think they’ll have a very good future. One of my colleagues here, Sig Gissler, who runs the Pulitzer Prize Program, he coined a word called “the tradigital journalist,” that is the traditional journalist with a digital overlay, and that’s what we tell people you need to be.

John Sparks
Technology has no doubt had its effect on the news business — newspaper circulation has shrunk, papers are in trouble, so are television stations. Is there a future for students studying journalism these days?

Sree Sreenivasan
Well you know our applications last year were up 40%, which was kind of stunning to a lot of people. But I got to say what it is is that young people are incredibly optimistic. They feel that they are seeing more journalism being done around us than ever before, more entrepreneurship, more savvy about the world, and more interest in the world, and they’re optimistic in a way that old fogies like us are not.

John Sparks
You know some people might say that the problem is the business model. Newspapers have been giving away their products online. Is it hard to put the genie back in the bottle once you’ve let it out?  In other words, will newspapers be able to start charging for online content and thus be able to survive do you think?

Listen to Part 5:

Sree Sreenivasan
Well, the newspaper question is a hard one. I’m a big believer in print, and I subscribe to two daily newspapers and five magazines.  I think there’s still something magical about it, and I believe that for the immediate future there is still — newspapers aren’t dead yet, but there are some certainly that are dying and some are going to evolve and make it through and others are not.  God bless them, they’ve got do all they can, and we need a bunch of different efforts, a bunch of different projects and experiments. Nobody has the answer. And you interview five pundits, they’ll tell you five different things that they know for sure about what works and what doesn’t, and what I say is if we knew for sure, then we wouldn’t all be sitting here having to have these conversations.

John Sparks
Sure. What about television with DVRs? Can television news survive?  What can television do to survive as an advertising-based medium?

Sree Sreenivasan
Well television is also trying in different ways, and I think again, there needs to be a lot of efforts in different kinds of storytelling, different kinds of engagement with the audience, different efforts that haven’t necessarily been tried, and I make the analogy that this is kind of bottom of the eighth in a … you know, you and I are watching the World Series and we see players who take pitch after pitch instead of making — taking a swing, right.

John Sparks
Right.

Sree Sreenivasan
And I want journalists to take a swing. Don’t just stand there because then you — all you’re doing is complaining: Gee, this has happened to me. Oh, woe is me. Well I ask them, “How tradigital are you?  Do you have a new media skill set?  Do you have a new media mindset?”  ”No.”  ”Well, you’re going to be in trouble.”

John Sparks
Is our democracy at stake in a society in which people do not read, don’t watch television news, don’t listen to the news on the radio?

Listen to Part 6:

Sree Sreenivasan
Look, I would say that there are millions of people who don’t do any of those things already, and you don’t need every single person to be invested in every single area or every single pillar of society for it to be useful.  What you need are people who are invested, a large proportion who are invested and care and all of that stuff, and as long as that happens, that’s fine. Not everybody needs to be engaged.  It’d be great if everybody was, but that’s not going to happen.

John Sparks
You know another thing we hear about is with the technology the ability…

Sree Sreenivasan
By the way, the comparison I would make is to voting. I mean, wouldn’t it be great if we had the same voting turnout as they do in Sri Lanka, 75, 80%?  We don’t.  You can’t force people to be engaged. People sometimes don’t care, and they leave it to others. It’s those others that need to make sure that they’re engaged.

John Sparks
Absolutely. You know we also hear about this business about tailoring our content, our own likes and dislikes, and the ability to do that with technology. Does that prevent us from being informed about important issues which we need to know about, and how do you overcome that problem?

Sree Sreenivasan
In what terms exactly do you mean?

John Sparks
Well, there’s all the talk about how broadcasters, newspaper publishers, journalists talk about tailoring content, how the consumer can tailor their content online so that they just view or read topics that are of interest to them and block out all the rest.  My question really is: Does that ability prevent us from being informed about important issues which we need to know about it?

Sree Sreenivasan
Sure. You’re talking about something that we’ve been discussing for years, the idea of kind of creating your own newspaper or …

John Sparks
Right.

Sree Sreenivasan
There are various different versions of this. Google has a section where you can personalize Google News.  What I like about that particular thing is you can personalize it so I’m getting only important stuff, such as Britney Spears, Balloon Boy, or whatever. And, John, I know that’s what you love.

John Sparks
(Inaudible) …

Sree Sreenivasan
But, but they also force you to read what they think are the top important stories according to the Google algorithm. And I think, let people drill down and be as specific as they want, but force them to do a little bit on the top, and I think you’ll be fine. And we’ll see. By the way, this idea of personalizing everything, people are too lazy to actually do it on a regular basis.

John Sparks
There’s a difference of course between blogs laced with opinion and stories written about so-called citizen journalists who have no training in fact-finding or attribution. There’s a difference between that and objective reporting of folks that are trained in journalism. Does the public understand the difference and … do you think … are they able discern and make the distinction?

Listen to Part 7:

Sree Sreenivasan
I think that people understand — as somebody who cares deeply about professional journalism, we’re charging students who come here to get a Master’s Degree in Journalism — that there’s an immense value in professional journalists, in people who know the topic well, are able to interpret, analyze, explain, et cetera, but at the same time, I learn an incredible amount of information from amateurs who care deeply about a certain topic.  Traditionally in journalism, experts have been professors with diplomas on their wall and tweed jackets and patches on their elbows and things like that, and that is one way to provide expertise is going to people like that. But expertise also comes from just passion and knowledge and working in a certain field, and those people have a lot to contribute in discussions on that particular field. There’s so many blogs that I read on a regular basis. I believe, by the way, and this is controversial for a boring professor like me to say, but in every area of the human interest there is a blog and a Twitter feed that journalists and others need to read because the blog and/or the Twitter feed are approaching in importance the traditional mainstream media outlet that dealt with that topic.  And that doesn’t mean it’s supplanting, it’s the only source, but it needs to be … we need to change our media diet to be open to these other tools, these other, not just tools, but also these other sources of information.

John Sparks
Absolutely. I could go on and talk to you all day about this because it’s my bread and butter and my passion as well, but I know that you have a busy calendar. In fact, I’ve seen your online calendar, and I must say trying to navigate that sometimes to get an appointment like this is challenging sometimes for those of us that who are maybe not as technologically adept as we should be.

Listen to Part 8:

Sree Sreenivasan
Yeah, you were talking about on my …

John Sparks
Your online calendar.

Sree Sreenivasan
On my calendar, yeah on my — both on my Web site and on sree.net and SreeTips.com.  By the way, your listeners, if they have any questions or comments about any of the stuff I’ve been saying here, I welcome their comments or questions. It’s at sree@sree.net is my email address.  S-R-E-E@S-R-E-E.net. My Twitter account is twitter.com/sreenet, S-R-E-E-N-E-T, and I’d love to carry on this conversation with others if they’re interested.

John Sparks
Great. We’ll certainly post that.  Is there anything else that you’d like to add before we call a conclusion to our interview?

Sree Sreenivasan
I would just … yeah, I think we’re all we’re concluding is the physical time we’ve got for this. The future is to be determined and that’s what’s so exciting, and it’s hard for people in their 40′s and 50′s and 60′s who have a mortgage and all of that, but young people have tremendous optimism, tremendous energy and just — that’s why you and I teach because we work and these people keep you — give you a level of excitement that is very hard to come across ourselves, I think.

Related Stories:

12/18: The Twitter “Craze:” Not So Much

12/18: Social Networks Grow in Popularity Among U.S. Residents

12/18: Technology’s Impact on Relationships

This Is Your Brain on Social Networks … Any Questions?

This Is Your Brain on Social Networks … Any Questions?

Have you ever fallen into a tech-hole?

You’re sitting at your computer, logged into your Facebook, Twitter and other social networking accounts, immersed in the links, videos, comments and other digital flotsam shooting down the info streams.  Meanwhile, a person, real flesh and blood, walks in the room and wants your attention.  You don’t hear his words; you mindlessly wave him away.  You’re busy … with your virtual friends.

Perhaps that’s never happened to you.  As for me, I’ve spent a serious number of hours in the tech-hole.  Based on a recent Marist poll, the number of Web users with social networking accounts, and perhaps susceptible to this experience, is growing rapidly.  This furious growth has led some to question whether the effects of spending so much time on Facebook, Twitter and their ilk could be harmful.

In the U.K., neuroscientist Susan Greenfield took her concerns about social networks to the House of Lords, suggesting that the use of the sites could affect the human brain — especially a child’s brain — in profound ways. One of her more frightening points was that using the sites could yield a generation of grown-ups with the emotional depth and cognitive abilities of big babies.  The social networks provide experiences that are “devoid of cohesive narrative and long-term significance,” said Greenfield.  ”As a consequence, the mid-21st century mind might almost be infantilized, characterized by short attention spans, sensationalism, inability to empathize and a shaky sense of identity.”  Among other things, she called for an investigation into whether the overuse of screen technologies could be linked to a recent spike in diagnoses of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.  People who spend formative years surfing the Internet, an environment characterized by “fast action and reaction,” could come to expect similar instant gratification in the non-virtual world, said Greenfield.

Her concerns have probably resonated with Web skeptics because she’s homed in on recognizably annoying online behavior. For example, if you’ve ever been irritated when a friend updates his or her status message to broadcast a favorite kind of toothpaste – e.g., “[Person X] is contemplating the different colors of AquaFresh” — Greenfield sympathizes. “Now what does this say about how you see yourself?” she asks of those prone to posting personal trivia. “Does this say anything about how secure you feel about yourself? Is it not marginally reminiscent of a small child saying ‘Look at me, look at me mummy!  Now I’ve put my sock on. Now I’ve got my other sock on.’”

Not everyone is receptive to Greenfield’s concerns.  Ben Goldacre, a British writer, broadcaster and doctor, and author of a Guardian column called Bad Science, says Greenfield is irresponsibly using her position as head of the Royal Institution of Great Britain — a body devoted to improving the public’s knowledge of science — because she doesn’t have any empirical evidence backing up her fears.  If Greenfield wants to promote awareness of the scientific method, says Goldacre, she shouldn’t be spending so much time airing her qualms about untested hypotheses.  Greenfield’s caveats that her purpose is to  raise questions, not give answers, aren’t enough for Goldacre; he says she’s recklessly generating scary headlines that frighten a Web-loving populace. “It makes me quite sad,” he writes, “when the public’s understanding of science is in such a terrible state, that this is one of our most prominent and well funded champions.”  In a heated BBC debate on the social networking controversy, you can see Goldacre square off against Dr. Aric Sigman, who says we should be wary about the time we spend in front of screens subtracting from the time we spend talking to people.

Despite the squabbling, it’s probably safe to say that thinkers on both sides of the issue would agree that more research is needed. To that end, various studies and polls have been published on the social networks in particular and increased Web use in general.  For example, the USC Annenberg Center for the Digital Future reported that households connected to the Internet were experiencing less “face-to-face family time, increased feelings of being ignored by family members using the Web, and growing concerns that children are spending too much time online.” On the other hand, a poll conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project suggests that use of cell phones and the Internet has not, generally speaking, contributed to social isolation (I urge you to view their conclusions for a much more precise explanation).

In the meantime, the tech-hole always beckons, so much so that Web addiction treatment centers have emerged to help people who can’t prioritize the real world over the virtual one.  While weighing in on the controversy, Maggie Jackson, the author of “Distracted: The Erosion of Attention and the Coming Dark Age,” offers this advice to Web users: “Going forward, we need to rediscover the value of digital gadgets as tools, rather than elevating them to social and cognitive panacea. Lady Greenfield is right: we need to grow up and take a more mature approach to our tech tools.” In other words, technology exists to support our relations with other human beings, not replace them.

In theory, it’s easy to remember that.  In practice, we might find ourselves sacrificing hours to the digital ether, convincing ourselves that we’re connected to everyone, but in reality being connected to no one.

Related Stories:

12/18: The Twitter “Craze:” Not So Much

12/18: Social Networks Grow in Popularity Among U.S. Residents

12/18: Technology’s Impact on Relationships

The Future of Technology and Journalism

12/15: Favorable First Lady

Overall, registered voters nationally like First Lady Michelle Obama.  68% have a favorable impression of her compared with 20% who hold an unfavorable view of her.  Even a majority of Republicans — 53% — think well of Mrs. Obama.  85% of Democrats and 61% of Independents say the same.

Table: Michelle Obama Favorability

High Marks for Mrs. Obama’s Performance as First Lady

Michelle Obama is also scoring points in how she is doing as First Lady of the United States.  57% of registered voters nationwide think Mrs. Obama is doing well in her position.  24% report she is doing a fair job, and 10% rate her poorly.  The First Lady is receiving kudos from more voters than she did when Marist last asked about her approval rating in March.  At that time, 50% of voters thought she was doing either an excellent or good job.  And, more voters have formed an impression of Mrs. Obama since March.  Currently, just 9% report they are unsure how to rate her compared with 24% when Marist last asked this question.

Click Here for Complete December 15th, 2009 USA Release and Tables

Voters also think that Mrs. Obama is keeping up her end of the bargain.  Nearly six in ten voters — 57% — say the First Lady has met their expectations.  15% report she has exceeded their expectations while 16% say she has fallen below their expectations.

Like her husband, Mrs. Obama is not immune from partisan politics.  However, even a majority of Republicans — 52% — think she is meeting their expectations.  63% of Democrats and 53% of Independent voters agree.

Table: Michelle Obama Approval Rating
Table: Michelle Obama Meeting Expectations?

But, Mrs. Obama Is Not Revolutionizing the Role of First Lady

More voters have formed an opinion about the impact Mrs. Obama is having on the role of First Lady, but the reviews aren’t great.  37% of registered voters nationally say Michelle Obama has changed the role for the better.  This is down from 43% in April.  The proportion of voters who think Mrs. Obama has adversely affected the position is now 10% compared with 5% in April, and 46% of voters report Mrs. Obama has not changed the role at all.  32% thought this way eight months ago.

Table: Impact on Role of First Lady

Mixed Reviews on Issue of Work-Family Balance

One of the issues Mrs. Obama professed to feeling passionately about prior to the start of her husband’s presidency was the issue of work-family balance.  What kind of an impact has she had on changing the view of that issue?  A plurality — 45% — says she has made no change at all while 40% believe she has made positive strides.  Just 5% report she has made the image worse.

Table: Impact on Work-Family Balance

Fashionable First Lady?

There was a lot of buzz surrounding Mrs. Obama’s fashion sense when she first entered the White House, but has her style lived up to the hype?  41% of registered voters believe she has changed fashion for the better while 8% think she has impacted it negatively.  39% say she has had no impact on it at all, and 12% are unsure.  In April, 37% of voters said Mrs. Obama’s style had a positive affect on fashion, 5% thought she made it worse, and 34% said she had little impact on it.  24%, at that time, were unsure.

Table: Impact on Fashion

Marist Poll Methodology

Next Page »