The big social networking site may be losing its grip.
(Page 2 of 2)
Mark Zuckerberg’s life conflicts with his creation. He fenced. He studied the classics, apparently quoting The Illiad at will. He learned four foreign languages before matriculating at Harvard. One wonders if he could have achieved all that in the distracting age of Facebook. Or, if the next Mark Zuckerberg will be too busy wasting in front of a screen to create something for the world’s offline inhabitants.
Facebook doesn’t equal faces in books — or faces outside for that matter. The glare of the screen indicating the computer is on also tells us that the person is off. Perhaps the greatest influence of Facebook, and other digital diversions, is the proliferation of fatsos and fools. Our brains and bodies regress as technology advances.
The decline is bad for the bank accounts of Facebook investors — both in terms of money and time — but good for their lives. When the curiosity wears off about how much an old flame now weighs, the user — fitting that the internet and drugs employ the same lingo — might take a walk or read a Roald Dahl story. FB’s declining investor interest, one hopes, represents Facebook’s declining user interest.
FB’s stock doing its best Greg Louganis impression doesn’t mean that it is the next Pets.com. It just means that Facebook is overrated and life isn’t.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?