WORRIES about the damage the internet may be doing to young people has produced a mountain of books—a suitably old technology in which to express concerns about the new. Robert Bly claims that, thanks to the internet, the “neo-cortex is finally eating itself”. Today’s youth may be web-savvy, but they also stand accused of being unread, bad at communicating, socially inept, shameless, dishonest, work-shy, narcissistic and indifferent to the needs of others.

The man who christened the “net generation” in his 1997 bestseller, “Growing Up Digital”, has no time for such views. In the past two years, Don Tapscott has overseen a $4.5m study of nearly 8,000 people in 12 countries born between 1978 and 1994. In “Grown Up Digital” he uses the results to paint a portrait of this generation that is entertaining, optimistic and convincing. The problem, he suspects, is not the net generation but befuddled baby-boomers, who once sang along with Bob Dylan that “something is happening here, but you don’t know what it is”, yet now find that they are clueless about the revolutionary changes taking place among the young.

“As the first global generation ever, the Net Geners are smarter, quicker and more tolerant of diversity than their predecessors,” Mr Tapscott argues. “These empowered young people are beginning to transform every institution of modern life.” They care strongly about justice, and are actively trying to improve society—witness their role in the recent Obama campaign, in which they organised themselves through the internet and mobile phones and campaigned on YouTube. Mr Tapscott’s prescient chapter on “The Net Generation and Democracy: Obama, Social Networks and Citizen Engagement” alone should ensure his book a wide readership.

Contrary to the claims that video games, Facebook and constant text-messaging have robbed today’s young of the ability to think, Mr Tapscott believes that “Net Geners” are the “smartest generation ever”. The experience of parents who grew up watching television is misleading when it comes to judging the 20,000 hours on the internet and 10,000 hours playing video games already spent by a typical 20-year-old American today. “The Net Generation is in many ways the antithesis of the TV generation,” he argues. One-way broadcasting via television created passive couch potatoes, whereas the net is interactive, and, he says, stimulates and improves the brain.

There is growing neuroscientific support for this claim. People who play video games, for example, have been found to process complex visual information more quickly. They may also be better at multi-tasking than earlier generations, which equips them better for the modern world.

Mr Tapscott identifies eight norms that define Net Geners, which he believes everyone should take on board to avoid being swept away by the sort of generational tsunami that helped Barack Obama beat John McCain. Net Geners value freedom and choice in everything they do. They love to customise and personalise. They scrutinise everything. They demand integrity and openness, including when deciding what to buy and where to work. They want entertainment and play in their work and education, as well as their social life. They love to collaborate. They expect everything to happen fast. And they expect constant innovation.

These patterns have important implications for the workplace. Employers who ban the use of Facebook in the office—the equivalent of forbidding older staff to use their rolodexes—show clear signs of being out of touch, he argues. Two out of three Net Geners feel that “working and having fun can and should be the same thing”. That does not mean they want to play games all day, but that they want the work itself to be enjoyable. They also expect collaboration, constant feedback and rapid career advancement based on merit. How they will react to being fired en masse as the downturn worsens remains to be seen, but Mr Tapscott suspects they will take it in their stride.

Two things do worry Mr Tapscott. One is the inadequacy of the education system in many countries; while two-thirds of Net Geners will be the smartest generation ever, the other third is failing to achieve its potential. Here the fault is the education, not the internet, which needs to be given a much bigger role in classrooms (real and virtual). The second is the net generation’s lack of any regard for personal privacy, which Mr Tapscott says is a “serious mistake, and most of them don’t realise it.” Already, posting pictures of alcohol fuelled parties, let alone mentioning drug use or other intimate matters, is causing a growing number of job applicants to fail the “reference test” as employers trawl Facebook and MySpace for clues about the character and behaviour of potential employees.

More optimistically, the Net Geners are much more positive than their predecessors about their family. Half of those interviewed regard at least one parent as their “hero”. Mr Tapscott believes the internet is producing an improved, more collaborative version of family life, which he calls the “open family”. Parents increasingly recognise that their youngsters have digital expertise they lack but want to tap, and also that their best defence against their children falling foul of the dark side of the internet, such as online sexual predators, is to win their children’s trust through honest conversation. Ironically, Mr Tapscott’s recommended “platform” for this essential social networking could hardly be more old tech: the family dinner table.

Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation is Changing Your World.
By Don Tapscott.
McGraw-Hill; 384 pages; $27.95 and £15.99

Copyright © 2008 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

THE phenomenon of Banksy, an English graffiti artist, seems to have got out of hand. Banksy, who trades heavily on his anonymity, began drawing on walls alongside streets in north London and Bristol, his hometown.

But his stencils—often of rats making mordant political jokes—have come in from the cold streets to the prosperous warmth of London galleries and auction houses. Record prices for Banksies have been repeatedly set and exceeded over the past nine months.

The rush began in February, when Sotheby's sold seven of Banksy's works in oil, enamel, acrylic and spray-paint. Bonhams took up the baton, and set the pace in April, selling Banksy's “Space Girl and Bird” for £288,000. This autumn, Bonhams has auctioned another 11 Banksies, and Bloomsbury no fewer than 21.

AFP

Art or parlour trick?

The April record was broken at Sotheby's on October 12th, when “The Rude Lord” (pictured)—an 18th century portrait that Banksy altered to show the subject giving a middle-finger salute—fetched £322,900. At a less well publicised Sotheby's sale three days later, six Banksies sold for a total of £447,000. Sotheby's has put three more in their sale on December 12th, with a modest top estimate of £150,000-£200,000.

What is happening? Is this a significant shift in taste, with popular street art claiming a place in the mainstream, or is it a phase? It could turn out to be a bubble.

Look closely at "The Rude Lord". Banksy bought the original for £2,000 and sold it for more than 150 times that. It exhibits most of his qualities: his anarchic sense of humour, his skill as a draftsman (though he never had any training or went to art school) and the quick and easy appeal of his work.

He has become a celebrity. When he was photographed working on a piece of clever street art in late October, it made many of the London papers. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt think he's terrific. So does Damien Hirst, who is an enthusiastic collector.

Banksy provides expensive provender for the contemporary art market, and if this is his strength, it is also his weakness: he is very easy to copy. In April, Christie's withdrew two Banksies from sale because of doubts about their authenticity, and stories about fraudulent Banksies pop up with a regularity that disturbs the auction houses. Since Banksy does not appear in public himself, Sotheby's arranges for his work to be authenticated by Steve Lazarides, his manager (and fellow Bristolian).

This month's Art Newspaper carries a damaging story about the appearance on eBay of 25 prints that appear to carry false authentification and may have been consigned by employees at one of Banksy's galleries, Pictures on Walls. (The gallery denies that the prints are fraudulent.)

Collectors who bought Banksies when they were young and he was entertaining have noticed this year's huge price inflation and are taking their profits. The temptation is irresistible. Ralph Taylor, Sotheby's man at the cutting edge—who thinks he might have met the artist but can't be sure—says that he takes calls regularly from people saying that they have a Banksy. A few of them had picked up pieces for £300 which auctioneers estimate at £50,000, and now find they are selling at between £70,000 and £100,000.

"You can kill a market," Mr Taylor warns, though Sotheby's, who will have put 18 Banksies up for sale in 2007, seems to believe this one is robust. Banksy appears to be unimpressed. "The art world is the biggest joke going," he said in the New Yorker in May. He could prove to be one of its best jokers.

Sotheby's sale of contemporary art takes place on December 12th in New Bond Street.

Copyright © 2007 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

If you luv Paula Abdul at all, run by her 1989 VMA preformance!! She was an amazing dancer.  Britney Spears should talk to herr about the downward spiral of stardom.  I'm sure Paula would have some great advice for her...

XOXOX

Keleen

Almost 1 year LAter