Opinion Piece Critiques Screen Overload and Leadership
An opinion article in The Washington Post discusses how society is, in a way, “suffocating on screen.” The piece attributes part of this issue to former President Donald Trump, suggesting that entertainment has led to negative effects on public discourse.
Writer Ryan Zickgraf, in a piece for Unherd, references Neil Postman’s 1985 book, *Amusing Ourselves to Death: The Age of Show Business*, to underscore his points. He notes, “The world is choking on screen, just as this book foretold.” Zickgraf argues that there’s a need to reconsider this argument as we navigate an age dominated by algorithms and political hysteria.
Zickgraf writes that Postman, who passed away in 2003, predicted a future not characterized by totalitarianism in the manner of Orwell’s *1984*, but by a more subtle, “pleasant dystopia” reminiscent of Huxley’s *Brave New World*. He emphasizes that democracy is at risk, not because it’s under siege, but because people seem to be caught off guard.
According to Zickgraf, social media has become a sort of modern “soma,” or “popular opium,” which distracts society from deeper existential issues that used to be addressed through religion or alcohol. He argues that if Postman were here in 2025, he might not be shocked to see that the digital equivalent of that recreational drug exists in platforms like TikTok, which distract users with endless streams of content. Each interaction—whether scrolling or clicking—offers fleeting moments of novelty or anger.
Interestingly, Zickgraf lays some blame directly at Trump’s feet, calling him a figure who has undergone a digital transformation, wielding social media with a sort of reckless abandon. Despite voicing threats or leaking private chats with global leaders, Zickgraf argues Trump falls short of being an “effective dictator” largely because he is so consumed by his own media narrative.
The Generational Divide
Shifting focus, Zickgraf discusses Gen Z, describing them as the “most sly generation” following a new analysis of media habits. He suggests that if Trump were to pursue dictatorial power, many people might not even realize due to their engrossment in technology and phones.
While there are certainly protests and public expressions of discontent, Zickgraf posits that these events often come across as superficial. For example, many who stormed the Capitol on January 6 seemed more interested in capturing selfies than in staging a genuine coup.
However, he does find some hope in Gen Z’s choices. Some young individuals seem to withdraw from the media noise, seeking out traditional faiths like Catholicism or Orthodoxy for genuine rituals. Zickgraf considers this a sign of hope amid a fragmented culture. He contrasts this with millennials, who sought a techno-utopia but are now disenchanted. In contrast, Gen Z appears less interested in reforming the system and more in withdrawing from it.
Zickgraf expresses that this new cultural movement, often seen at gatherings like “No Kings,” is less about radical change and more about seeking silence and simplicity. He suggests that if there is any prospect of reclaiming reality from the chaotic digital landscape, it might just lie with this new generation, although what that entails remains uncertain.
