or even TV or computer games.

甚至電視或電腦遊戲。

Answer?

回答？

It's actually from 1936 and it's talking about the radio.

其實這是1936年的，說的是收音機。

And how about this?

那這個呢？

OK, so this quote is talking about phone addiction,

好吧，這句話說的是手機成癮。

but the phones in question are landlines. Remember them?

但問題的電話是固定電話。還記得他們嗎？

Well there was a time when people worried about

曾經有一段時間，人們擔心

how addictive they were.

他們是如何上癮。

We see today concern over social media,

我們今天看到對社交媒體的關注。

before it was the internet, then we had video nasties,

之前是互聯網，然後我們有視頻鼻祖。

television, radio, cinema…

電視、廣播、電影...

Meet Kirsten Drotner, Professor of Media Studies

認識媒體研究教授Kirsten Drotner。

at the University of Southern Denmark...

在南丹麥大學...

How many did I get to?

我到了多少人？

...who's been writing about this topic for over 20 years.

......誰一直在寫這個話題超過20年。

The name I coined for it is a “media panic”.

我給它起的名字是 "媒體恐慌"。

Whenever a new medium arrives on the social scene

每當一個新的媒介出現在社會舞臺上的時候

and is taken up in a big way,

並被大肆收購。

then we see these very, very stark emotional reactions.

然後，我們看到這些非常，非常鮮明的情緒反應。

According to Kirsten, when you look through history

根據Kirsten的說法，當你翻閱歷史的時候

one can see the same pattern of concern repeating itself -

殊途同歸

often even using the same language and metaphors.

甚至經常使用相同的語言和比喻。

So today there's lots of talk of social media addiction,

所以今天有很多人說社交媒體成癮。

comparing it to drugs.

將其與毒品相提並論。

But it's easy to forget that Pac-Man, Pinball and television

但人們很容易忘記，吃豆人，彈球和電視。

were described in the same way.

以同樣的方式描述。

Or reports talk of the addictive “dark side” of social media,

或報道談及社交媒體上癮的 "黑暗面"。

echoing the way that computer games were described.

與電腦遊戲的描述方式相呼應。

Or, another example, social media is compared to opiates -

或者，另一個例子是，將社交媒體比作鴉片劑--。

the same language that was used to describe television and Nintendo.

用來形容電視和任天堂的語言是一樣的。

And the drugs metaphor goes further back.

而毒品的比喻還要更早。

What do you think was described as the “marijuana of the nursery”

你覺得被形容為 "苗圃的大麻 "是什麼？

because they were so addictive?

因為他們是如此上癮？

The answer?

答案是什麼？

Comic books

漫畫書

which, by the middle of the 20th Century,

其中，到20世紀中葉。

had got people so worried about their addictiveness

讓人們如此擔心他們的上癮性。

that there were bestsellers about the harm they were doing young people,

有一些暢銷書講述了他們對年輕人的傷害。

official inquiries,

官方查詢。

even public burnings.

甚至公開焚燒。

OK, last quote...

好了，最後一句話...

As destructive as cocaine?

和可卡因一樣具有破壞性？

That would be the novel.

那就是小說了。

Novels were silly, novels were enervating,

小說很傻，小說很讓人心動。

novels were the worst form of mental food,

小說是最糟糕的精神食糧。

novels were narcotic, novels were addictive.

小說是麻醉品，小說是癮君子。

This is Ankhi Mukherjee from the University of Oxford

我是牛津大學的Ankhi Mukherjee。

and she's talking about a time when lots of people were genuinely worried

她說的是很多人真正擔心的時候

about people reading.

關於人們閱讀。

You had reviewers of children's literature writing in journals saying

你有兒童文學作品的審稿人在期刊上寫道

this is terrible for children -

這是可怕的兒童 -

it's terrible for children to be given books.

給孩子們看書太可怕了。

It was feared they would become addicted.

怕他們會上癮。

And this is Frank Furedi,

這位是Frank Furedi,

who has written extensively about this phenomenon.

他對這一現象有大量的文章。

And pretty much in the same way that we see the social media today

和我們今天看到的社交媒體幾乎一樣

being responsible for uncivil behaviour and for a variety of sins,

對不文明行為和各種罪惡負責；

so too in the 18th Century

十八世紀也是如此

the novel was the target of that kind of criticism.

小說是那種責備的對象。

You can find novels described as evil, as a vice,

你可以發現小說中描述的是邪惡，是一種惡習。

and blamed for violence.

並被指責為暴力。

And yet today, if anything, people are worried that young people

然而今天，如果說人們擔心的是年輕人

are not reading enough novels.

都是小說讀得不夠多。

Whether it's radio, telephones, comic books or novels,

無論是收音機、電話、漫畫書還是小說。

we see a similar pattern.

我們看到類似的模式。

There's a kind of historical amnesia -

有一種歷史失憶症--------。

that media, for example, that 20 years ago

例如，20年前的那家媒體

were really, really the object of concern,

是真的，真的是關注的對象。

then all of a sudden we don't hear very much about it.

然後突然間，我們沒有聽到很多關於它。

I think something that's helpful for thinking about media panics

我認為對思考媒體恐慌有幫助的東西

is the Gartner Hype Cycle, developed by a US company

是美國一家公司開發的Gartner炒作週期。

and used to describe the way technologies are adopted by society.

並用來描述技術被社會採用的方式。

According to this theory, a new technology

根據這一理論，一種新技術

often has a moment of enthusiasm and high expectations,

常常會有一時的熱情和高漲的期望。

when it seems like it might be the solution to everything.

當它看起來像它可能是解決一切問題。

It's being called “The Twitter Revolution”.

它被稱為 "Twitter革命"。

This is then followed by a crash - a period of disillusionment

然後是崩潰--幻滅期

and scepticism, before both hype and fear level off

炒作和懷疑，在炒作和恐懼平息之前。

and everyone basically calms down.

大家就基本平靜下來了。

But with media panics,

但隨著媒體的恐慌。

while the concerns about each particular media might fade,

而對每個特定媒體的關注可能會淡化。

the overall state of anxiety continues

整體焦慮狀態持續

as something new fills the gap.

因為新的東西填補了空白。

So why do media panics keep occurring?

那麼，為什麼媒體的恐慌會不斷髮生呢？

One straightforward explanation for media panics

媒體恐慌的一個直接解釋

is that adults have a natural parental concern for the young,

是成年人對年輕人有一種天然的父母關懷。

not remembering - because they were children at the time -

不記得了--因為他們當時還是孩子

that the generation before had similar worries about them.

前一代人對他們有類似的擔心。

Another possible explanation is something called

另一種可能的解釋是所謂的

the “third person effect”

第三人稱效應

which describes a tendency to believe

它描述了一種傾向，即相信

that other people will be more affected

其他人會受到更大的影響

by a media message than you are.

由媒體資訊比你。

This is how we can have no problem reconciling our own pretty benign

這就是為什麼我們可以毫不猶豫地調和我們自己的漂亮的良性。

experiences with a media technology with a belief that it will cause

在使用某項媒體技術的過程中，相信它將會引起人們的注意。

much greater harm to others.

對他人的傷害更大。

There's a very negative impoverished view of what human beings are

對人類的看法是非常消極貧困的

in a lot of the discussion on the media.

在很多媒體的討論中。

They are really, really too stupid,

他們真的，真的太傻了。

they're uneducated, they cannot deal with the complexities

不識時務，懷璧其罪

of everyday life, and therefore they become pretty much the prisoners

是以，他們幾乎成了囚犯。

of the media.

的媒體。

A final theory is to do with something social scientists call

最後一種理論是與社會科學家們所謂的

“cultural capital”.

"文化資本"；

The idea is that along with economic capital and social capital,

認為，隨著經濟資本和社會資本。

one thing that establishes your position in society

一物降一物

is your knowledge about culture.

是你對文化的認識。

And this is especially true for those most often most concerned

尤其是對於那些最經常關注的人來說，更是如此。

about new media.

關於新媒體。

To middle class people who can't fall back on landed property,

對不能依靠土地財產的中產階級來說。

they invest a lot in themselves in order to get on in society.

他們為了在社會上立足，在自己身上投入了很多。

They invest a lot in education,

他們在教育上的投資很大。

in operating according to the right cultural norms.

在按照正確的文化規範操作時，。

But when new types of media come along

但當新型媒體出現時

it threatens their investment in these old forms of cultural capital,

它威脅到他們對這些舊形式的文化資本的投資。

so no wonder they react nervously.

所以難怪他們反應緊張。

It's also a precarious investment

這也是一項不穩定的投資

because they live in a dynamic society,

因為他們生活在一個動態的社會中。

and modern society - through the 18th Century and on -

和現代社會 -- -- 一直到18世紀，並繼續 -- -- 。

is based on change.

是基於變化的。

"Meantime some big investors now are calling on Apple to help fight

"與此同時，一些大的投資者現在呼籲蘋果公司幫助打擊。

what it considers an addiction to the iPhone..."

它認為對iPhone上癮..."

Currently there's a debate going on about smartphones and social media

目前，關於智能手機和社交媒體的爭論正在進行中

with some scientists arguing there's evidence for harm,

與一些科學家認為，有證據表明危害。

while many others are unconvinced.

而其他很多人卻不服氣。

But while it makes sense to be cautious,

不過，雖然謹慎是有道理的。

knowing the history of media panics should help give us some perspective.

瞭解媒體恐慌的歷史，應該有助於給我們一些看法。

I'm also a parent and I'm also a grandparent and I'm also concerned,

我也是父母，我也是祖父母，我也很關心。

and I think it's fine to be concerned,

我覺得關注一下也無妨。

because it's a kind of indication that you take responsibility.

因為這是你承擔責任的一種表現。

But I think there's a difference between being concerned

但我認為，關注和關心是有區別的。

and panicking, because if you panic, you can't think.

和慌亂，因為如果你慌亂，你不能思考。

We don't know what effect

我們不知道有什麼影響

social media and smartphones will have long-term on our society,

社交媒體和智能手機將對我們的社會產生長期影響。

but what we do know is that, as long as we keep inventing

但我們知道的是，只要我們不斷地去發明

new forms of media,

新形式的媒體。

the cycle of panic is likely to continue.

恐慌的循環很可能會繼續下去。