Disconnection presents itself as a modern answer to problems of media addiction and overuse. But, is it really novel? Through a thematic analysis of Dutch and American newspaper articles spanning several decades, this study examines public news discourses on TV and smartphone addiction and their imagined solutions. The analysis reveals Apparatgeist: While there are parallels stemming from similar affordances, the discourse surrounding each affliction and its treatment is also unique to its time. While TV addiction discourse alludes to the loss of traditional values, smartphone addiction discourse emphasizes self-governance. Disconnection is framed as a solution but is imbued with moral imperatives regarding the necessity of self-discipline and productive time. Overall, smartphone addiction discourse points toward being “present” and “in touch with one’s authentic Self” as states that are morally valuable and time-worthy, but under stress in contemporary society.
AagaardJ (2021) Beyond the rhetoric of tech addiction: why we should be discussing tech habits instead (and how). Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences20: 559–572. doi: 10.1007/s11097-020-09669-z.
2.
AarsethEBeanAMVan RooijAJ (2017). Scholars’ open debate paper on the World Health Organization ICD-11 gaming disorder proposal. Journal of Behavioral Addictions6(3): 267–270. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.088.
3.
BeattieADaubsMS (2020). Framing ‘Digital Well-Being’ as a Social Good. First Monday.
4.
BeckU (2000). The cosmopolitan perspective: sociology of the second age of modernity. The British journal of sociology51(1): 79–105.
5.
BillieuxJSchimmentiAKhazaalY, et al. (2015). Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research. Journal of behavioral addictions4(3): 119–123.
6.
CampbellSWParkYJ (2008). Social implications of mobile telephony: the rise of personal communication society. Sociology compass2(2): 371–387.
7.
CederströmCSpicerA (2015) The Wellness Syndrome. Cambridge, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
8.
CohenS (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics. London, UK: Routledge.
9.
CrawfordKLingelJKarppiT (2015). Our metrics, ourselves: a hundred years of self-tracking from the weight scale to the wrist wearable device. European Journal of Cultural Studies18(4–5): 479–496.
10.
De LeynTDe WolfRAbeeleMV, et al. (2019). Reframing current debates on young people’s online privacy by taking into account the cultural construction of youth. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on social media and society, Toronto, Canada, 19–21 July 2019. New York, USA, pp. 174–183. Association for Computing Machinery.
11.
DeuzeM (2011). Media life. Media, culture and society33(1): 137–148.
12.
FeltLJRobbMB (2016) Technology addiction: Concern, controversy, and finding balance. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.
13.
FischerJMRavizzaM (2000) Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. New York, USA: Cambridge university press.
14.
GergenKJ (2002). The challenge of absent presence. In: KatzJEAakhusMA (Eds), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, (pp. 227–241).
15.
GiddensA (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge, UK: Stanford university press.
16.
HermannCHofbauerI (2007) The European social model: Between competitive modernisation and neoliberal resistance. Capital & Class31(3): 125–139.
17.
JenkinsH (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York, New York University Press.
18.
JiangJ (2018) Teens Who Are Constantly Online Are Just as Likely to Socialize with Their Friends Offline. Washington, USA: Pew Research Center.
19.
KatzJEAakhusMA (2002) Conclusion: making meaning of mobiles–a theory of Apparatgeist. In: Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk. Public Performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 301–318.
20.
KirmayerLJ (1989). Cultural variations in the response to psychiatric disorders and emotional distress. Social Science and Medicine29(3): 327–339.
Nkansah-AmankraSAgbanuSKMillerRJ (2013). Disparities in health, poverty, incarceration, and social justice among Racial Groups in the United States: a critical review of evidence of close links with neoliberalism. International Journal of Health Services43(2): 217–240. doi: 10.2190/HS.43.2.c
23.
OrbenA (2020). The Sisyphean cycle of technology panics. Perspectives on Psychological Science15(5): 1143–1157.
24.
ParkCSKayeBK (2019). Smartphone and self-extension: functionally, anthropomorphically, and ontologically extending self via the smartphone. Mobile Media and Communication7(2): 215–231.
25.
PilipetsE (2019). From netflix streaming to netflix and chill: the (dis) connected body of serial binge-viewer. Social Media + Society5(4): 1–13.
26.
RainieHWellmanB (2012). Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, MA: Mit Press.
27.
RosaH (2003). Social acceleration: ethical and political consequences of a desynchronized high-speed society. Constellations10(1): 3–33.
28.
RossMQBayerJB (2021) Explicating self-phones: Dimensions and correlates of smartphone self-extension. Mobile Media & Communication. doi: 10.1177/2050157920980508.
29.
SandersR (2017). Self-tracking in the digital era: biopower, patriarchy, and the new biometric body projects. Body and Society23(1): 36–63.
30.
ScheffTJ (2017) Being Mentally Ill: A Sociological Study. New York, USA: Routledge.
31.
SharonT (2017). Self-tracking for health and the quantified self: re-articulating autonomy, solidarity, and authenticity in an age of personalized healthcare. Philosophy and Technology30(1): 93–121.
SyvertsenT (2020) Digital Detox: The Politics of Disconnecting. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
34.
SyvertsenTEnliG (2020) Digital detox: Media resistance and the promise of authenticity. Convergence26(5–6): 1269–1283. doi: 10.1177/1354856519847325.
35.
SzaszT (1976). The myth of mental illness. In: Biomedical Ethics and the Law. Boston, MA: Springer, pp. 113–122.
36.
ThriftN (2004). Remembering the technological unconscious by foregrounding knowledges of position. Environment and planning D: Society and space22(1): 175–190.
37.
TokunagaRS (2015). Perspectives on internet addiction, problematic internet use, and deficient self-regulation: contributions of communication research. Annals of the International Communication Association39(1): 131–161.
38.
Vanden AbeeleMMP (2020) Digital wellbeing as a dynamic construct. Communication Theory. doi: 10.1093/ct/qtaa024.
39.
Vanden AbeeleMMPDe WolfRLingR (2018). Mobile media and social space: how anytime, anyplace connectivity structures everyday life. Media and Communication6(2): 5–14.
40.
Van DijckJ (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: big data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance and society12(2): 197–208.
41.
VordererPKrömerNSchneiderFM (2016). Permanently online–Permanently connected: explorations into university students’ use of social media and mobile smart devices. Computers in Human Behavior63: 694–703.
42.
WajcmanJ (2015) Pressed for Time: The Acceleration of Life in Digital Capitalism. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press.
43.
WajcmanJ (2008). Life in the fast lane? Towards a sociology of technology and time. The British journal of sociology59(1): 59–77.
44.
WalshJP (2020). Social media and moral panics: assessing the effects of technological change on societal reaction. International Journal of Cultural Studies23(6): 840–859.
45.
Ytre-ArneBSyvertsenTMoeH, et al. (2020). Temporal ambivalences in smartphone use: conflicting flows, conflicting responsibilities. new media and society22(9): 1715–1732.
46.
ZuboffS (2015). Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology30(1): 75–89.
