Social Surplus

As I foreshadowed in my article Why Game? I got interested in this idea of the Social Surplus.

While I was looking through the numbers for how much time was spent playing games I was shocked to say the least. 10,000 hours is a hell of a lot of time and as Chris pointed out, 10,000 hours would be about right for the required amount of time to become an expert at something. That amount of time though was dwarfed by the amount of time spent watching TV.

I always knew people watched a tremendous amount of TV. When I found some statistics though I must admit I felt slightly ill. The Nielson group released the following figures. In the first quarter of this year the average for people aged 25-30 was 144 hours a month, which spins out to be a shade un 5 hours a day. 5 Hours a day!? Jesus Christ. In the five years between 25-30 we will average 8,500 hours.

As the age bracket creeps up it just gets worse. When we finally hit 65+ we are watching around 7 hours a day. That is such a disgustingly large amount of TV.

Where does my term of Social Surplus come from though? Well that’s exactly what this TV viewing is. I would argue that using that using this time to play games is more, if only slightly in some cases (Looking at MMO’s here), productive. Watching TV is basically a time sink, you get nothing out of it except the fleeting enjoyment that is gone the moment you stand up. It is lost time. Again as with games I understand people need to relax and unwind, but for 5 hours a day?

To put it into numbers that we are able to relate to lets have a look at Wikipedia. We all know it, we all use it, we have an understanding, if shaky, of just how massive an undertaking it was/is. Lets say using their page of what has been done and doing some dodgy numbers we come up with 150million hours of collective human effort. Everything, every article, every edit, every language, we would be talking in the ball park of 150million hours of effort.

Now let’s look at the amount of time that the age bracket of 25-30year olds in America spent watching TV in one year. Call it 22Million people (going on rough data here) at 4.8 hours a day we end up with:

38,544,000,000

That’s for one age group. Each year. Spent wasting time in front of the TV. That is the equivalent of over 250 Wikipedia’s every year. That’s a complete and whole new encyclopedia of all human knowledge every two days! Being pissed away watching American Idol.

Getting people to do any form of work is difficult. The only reason most people have a job is money, not enjoyment. The reason Wikipedia worked is that anyone could spend any amount of time on it they wanted and straight away get something back. It extended itself and said “Look, the tools are here, help yourself”. Anything that can do that will work; we only have to look at something as stupid as, say, lolcats. It extends the idea of “look, if you have a picture of a cat and large Helvetica Font you can participate”. And people did, in droves. It is a meme that has still not totally died.

People no longer expect or even accept media that does not extend itself to them. Whenever I read anything on the internet I now instinctively spin to the bottom and read the comments. The only reason I still read Slashdot is for the comment. Even here I changed over my blog to WordPress because it had easy to use comments.

I believe the next big thing; the next great advancement will somehow involve harnessing this massive amount of social surplus and funneling it into something else. It will require a rethinking of the almost all forms of media. Any form of news story that I cannot comment on? Not interested.

As I said finding a way of channeling this surplus is key. A project like Wikipedia was a great idea but there are hundreds more. How about a relationship mapping chart? You would start from you and input all the family links that you know of. If it got large enough you could travel down those links to see who else you are connected to. As long as it had a simple interface and an inviting look it could work. Or a hyper local news site where you could jump in to your local area and read what is going on or post what you have seen, specials down at the local café, road works on this side street.

The possibilities when you start thinking in these numbers are amazing. What else could be achieved?

6 Responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Kate on 14.12.09 at 12:10 pm

    Know something worse about LOLcats?

    I’ve seen them using COMIC SANS. Seriously. COMIC FCUKING SANS.

    PS I love LOLcats. But I hate Comic Sans. Just sayin’.

  2. Posted by Andrew Carr on 14.12.09 at 12:10 pm

    You should pick up Clay Shirkey’s book “Here comes everybody”. He’s just about one of the most switched on thinkers about new online technology and how its affecting social change, including issues such as this on leaderless organisation.

    That said, you can’t expect people to spend most of their down time doing something productive. Humans are just another animal, and whilst we sleep a lot less than say cats, dogs, cows, etc we do need time relaxing and enjoying ourselves in order to be at full capacity the following day. So the biological imperative as well as the ease of particular entertainment forms like TV contribute to that.

    That said, computers are significantly increasing their role as a key entertainment centre, and that for many people includes not just video/music, but increased time on their hobbies (like photography) or increased social interaction (social networking) and public sphere participation (news & commentary on current events/websites/blogs etc). With the opportunities in front of us, people are gravitating towards more creative and publicly engaged uses of their times, in ways that simply weren’t possible 20 years ago leading to instead picking up the tv remote. (Though in the 20s, 30s & 40s public events like political speeches, concerts, plays etc were far more well attended, offering both social and mental stimulation).

    So the biggest problem seems technological and biological rather than a culture of lazyness.

  3. Posted by David on 14.12.09 at 12:10 pm

    @Kate ..some people have no idea. I like helvetica myself, it is not the norm for lolcats though.. but seriously… comic sans…. ;/

    @Andrew cheers for the heads up on the book. Will try and pick it up.
    I agree with you that we need time relaxing. I am on board there. However as I said in the post, 5 hours a day achieving nothing? I relax by reading, playing games and mooching on the internet. Reading is solitary yet it teaches me something, gaming is a social experience where I am learning to work effectively in a team and mooching? generally getting involved with something online or yet again learning. Now I am not saying I am great, I also watch a lot of stupid crap on the net (ahh the endurance run, http://www.giantbomb.com/videos/).

    What I am saying is that the next big projects will be a way of making doing something constructive enjoyable and attractive. Anything is a step up from TV.

  4. Posted by Eamon on 14.12.09 at 12:10 pm

    I would say Facebook counts as relationship mapping software. For the CIA at least.

  5. Posted by David Klemke on 14.12.09 at 12:10 pm

    Was this post inspired by this article?

    http://www.herecomeseverybody.org/2008/04/looking-for-the-mouse.html

    Clay Shirky mentioned this idea about a year and a half ago.

  6. Posted by David on 14.12.09 at 12:10 pm

    I found him while researching. While looking I am fairly sure he was the first to coin the term Social Surplus. I also stole the idea of using Wikipdia as a measurement.

    However I disagree with his take of the need for social adjustment. We did not have to get wasted for a generation to adjust the to the industrial revolution. People adjust fast. If this held idea held through today we are experiencing faster social adjustment than the industrial revolution every 5 years at the moment and it is only going to get faster. We do not need to be anesthetized by Sitcoms.

    The idea that we used sitcoms to dissipate our thoughts is just wrong, we have always needed to deal with our situations, the added free time is not something that would have destroyed civilization. People just found an incredible, easy accessible entertainment medium and exploited it, as we still do today.

Respond to this post