People often think I’m a douchebag because when I’m asked if I saw <insert name of TV reality show, soap, drama or sitcom here>, I answer “I don’t have a TV,” which completely kills the conversation.
That’s probably for the best, because I’d be an even bigger douchebag if I pointed out how much of their cognitive surplus they’re wasting by passively watching crap TV.
If you haven’t guessed by now, the term “cognitive surplus” was coined by Clay Shirky to describe the time freed from watching TV that is redistributed to other (oftentimes more useful) tasks and thoughts.
I immediately fell in love with the term and the concept when I saw him talking about it on YouTube (videos embedded below).
He actually wrote a whole book about it and it’s coming out in a couple of weeks. I can’t wait to read it.
All this pondering about the cognitive surplus is a direct result of putting my own cognitive surplus to use. In the past eight years, I’ve only had a TV in my apartment for half that time (while I had a roommate) — and, not so surprisingly, I’ve found that I’m insanely more productive when I don’t have that cognitive suck as the centerpiece of my living room.
By turning off the tube over the years, I’ve magically found time to work a second job (three of them), complete a full-time semester of community college classes, start my own business, become politically involved, build several websites from scratch, and become an avid hiker. I’ve also read a whole bunch of books and watched a ton of TED talks and university lectures on YouTube.
The lack of TV has made me a better person. I’ve reacquired tube time and put it to practical use. Can you imagine what will happen to society as a whole when everyone frees up their cognitive surplus? I can’t wait to see!
If you still don’t understand what Shirky means, check out these two videos of him explaining it more than two years ago:
My name is Micheal Foley. I'm an ex-journalist, content editor at Waggener Edstrom, hyperlocal news fan, content strategy n00b, geek wannabe, libertarian and provocateur. I'm trying to get journalists to look past "how to save journalism institutions" and instead think about "how to save society after journalism institutions are gone." 
Great post. I had to read it during the commercials of As the World Turns but what I skim read sounded really thought provoking.
I kind of wonder if we could cure cancer, solve world hunger/peace, etc if we had just never invented the boob tube.
Oops, ATWT is back on – got to see what is going on with Luke and Noah…
I can’t wait to read the book. It sickens me when I watch kids and even adults for that matter, who spend every free moment watching crappy TV or playing mindless video games. TV has killed creativity and imagination.
Nice post. Even though a computer has a mouse, I still feel we waste waaaay too much of our cognitive surplus on it. It’s essentially a fancy boob tube.
I recently unsubscribed my cable service to save money and found myself with more time to work on other things. The entire family has even been reading more. We now make weekly visits to the library. The kids have even begun they’re own review websites. Funny how much time you find you have when not watching TV.
I still watch a few of my favorite shows online but spend far less TV watching these days.
LB: I agree. It will be totally interesting to see how we enrich our lives and solve problems now that we are really working on them.
Beth: Video games don’t bother me as much. At least they are engaged in something that stimulates the mind, and not passively whiling away time.
Carol: I don’t agree with you. TV and the Internet are vastly different. TV is a solitary experience; the Web is a collaboratory, social experience. TV is a passive experience; the Web is an engaging participatory experience. TV programming is set up for the lowest common denominator; the Web is set up for every possible denominator. TV channels are finite; Websites are seemingly endless. The cost to participate in television (buy your own studio, cameras, lights, production crew, air time, etc.) is prohibitively expensive; the cost to participate on the Web is near zero. Verdict: TV is a toxic dish prepared by profit-seeking elitists; the Web is a vastly diverse feast served and eaten by all of us. Sharing is better than force-feeding. The Web wins, hands down. —END OF RANT—
Greg: I’m really excited to see how the cognitive surplus manifests itself in young people. It’s easy to know how people with my background react to this stuff, but someone who doesn’t know what it’s like to utterly waste an entire adolescence on force-fed crap? — the world is their workshop. I can’t see what they build for us!
Foley,
I couldn’t DISagree more. Though, I still love you.
Some of your points seem to back what I said; “TV channels are finite; Websites are seemingly endless.” Finite does more than imply that eventually it will end. On the other hand, with the seemingly endless websites, there’s just that much more for us to waste our time.
And shit, just because it’s “participatory” (and who really gives a shit anyway besides this one guy you found) does NOT mean it’s a good use of your cognitive surplus. There are just as much – no wait, probably more since the web is seemingly endless – toxic dishes on the web than on TV.
I’m not a huge fan of either.
And also, the TV is not force feeding anything, just as the web isn’t. If you don’t want to watch, then don’t. It’s that simple. No forcing involved.
Carol: I think the whole point is that people are disconnecting from passive, isolated experiences and exchanging them for engaged, social experiences. Whether that happens on the web or in person, the effect is similar.
While I agree that not EVERY use of the web is beneficial, it is a more engaging experience, which, in turn makes it better than passively wasting time.
Shirky’s point is that when given the option to participate in media, many people take that option and awesome amounts of cognition are unearthed.
Wait, so if I’m reading this correctly – you’re saying that the people on the TV aren’t REAL and living inside my television? I feel as if you’ve just told me that Santa Clause isn’t real or that Liberace was gay.
Carol: You are my hero. I said something similar to Micheal about the internet almost being like an extension of the TV for a lot of folks and I’m pretty sure he just put on his headphones and stopped listening.
Micheal: What exactly are you doing with your cognitive surplus? You don’t ever actually tell us…
LB: You must’ve missed this paragraph:
“By turning off the tube over the years, I’ve magically found time to work a second job (three of them), complete a full-time semester of community college classes, start my own business, become politically involved, build several websites from scratch, and become an avid hiker. I’ve also read a whole bunch of books and watched a ton of TED talks and university lectures on YouTube.”
I also forgot to mention that I’ve volunteered my time for charity as well.
I’m aghast at the paragraph on how productive you have been since you turned off TV permanently! Unbelievable!
Apologies, I meant what are you CURRENTLY doing with your cognitive surplus?
And I believe that I said that I skim read the post, so pbbt.
Carol: Here’s a great article that explores both sides of the issue:
http://gizmodo.com/5556264/is-the-internet-making-us-smarter-or-stupider
Enjoy!
I too went through a phase when I refused to own or watch TV. It was when I was in college and I suspect there was a direct correlation between my attitude about TV and the fact that I had a 3.5 GPA when many of my suitemates were on academic probation. I’ve since relaxed my attitude about TV (though still I dislike having it in the living room, and confine it to an upstairs “den”), and now I willfully watch some TV as a means of staying in touch with pop culture (otherwise I risk floating into my NPR elite lalaland). And I do think some shows – like The Daily Show and Stephen Colbert – actually stimulate my thinking.
So observing my own mental and behavioral patterns when I watch TV and when I don’t, as well as when I spend excessive time online and when I don’t, I’d say it’s not so simple as one is good and the other bad, nor that passive time is bad and active is good… there are times when we all crave passive entertainment because we’re just tired. But there are other times when we crave passive stimulation (which is how I see much internet activity) and it results in inertia (such as right now, when my intent is to walk down to a cafe with the dog, and instead I’m slouching in a chair scratching my internet itch).
I haven’t read Shirky’s stuff in depth, but I’d suggest there’s an element to the Cognitive Surplus discussion that has to do with discipline and awareness. Being aware of whether something is draining your cognitive energy or feeding it; awareness of the addictive nature of cognitive stimulation; and discipline to turn it off and give yourself space before you become over-satieted (whether from passive entertainment or active cognitive stimulation).
I find it ironic that this article is linked to a video.
Aly: You obviously missed the point.
Media is a triathlon (consume, create, share), not a single activity (consume). In the mass media era we were forced into the role of consumers because few had the means of production (printing press, television studio, radio transmitter) to engage in creating or sharing media on a broad scale.
Now we can.
I shared a YouTube video with my post, because I can. It’s illegal for me to share a television program.
See the difference?