[Second Opinion] In defense of the millennials

by Gideon Lasco
Philippine Daily Inquirer

It is human nature to find fault in the next generation. The Baby Boomers were critiqued by their elders for eschewing traditional values, but they in turn critiqued the Gen X-ers for being too carefree, unfocused, even cynical. Although it is fashionable to say “the kids these days,” accompanied with a sigh, the suggestion that the so-called “millennials” are exceptionally different from generations past has little factual basis.

The perceived frivolity of emojis, for instance, can be seen in the context of every generation deploying linguistic playfulness to set itself apart — and adapt to technology. Just as the youth of the ’40s and ’50s inverted words to the annoyance of their ermat and erpat, the youth of today are inventing acronyms and metaphors: I hope they don’t find this essay TL;DR — or worse, boring AF.

Much has also been said about how millennials are addicted to selfies. But self-photography has always been important for Filipinos. In the past, people went to great lengths just to have their self-portraits, even going to studios, and buying albums and photo frames to “display” their pictures — a function now taken over by Facebook and Instagram.

And what of their supposed overdependence on the internet? This I take as a valid concern (more on this later), but take note that every new technology — from electricity to video games — is perceived thus by those who did not grow up with it. Haven’t parents been railing against TV for the past half-century?

Finally, student civic engagement is derided as naive, as if the “grownups” in 1972 viewed the students of their time any differently. Surely, the young ilustrados and the revolutionaries who came after them were likewise derided for their “juvenile” ideas, but today nobody questions the wisdom of Rizal, who incidentally saw the youth as the hope of the nation.

An entire generation defies generalization: There are many “millennials” who do not have access to the internet, let alone smartphones. On the other hand, I know old people who are more hooked to Facebook than their grandkids. However, there are significant social and technological changes today that affect most millennials the most.

Social media, for instance, has created a new way of “separate togetherness:” Folks can be together at one dinner table but worlds apart in their smartphones. It has also created a problematic form of validation—through “likes” and “shares.”

The near-universal availability of information from the internet, moreover, can lead to the complacent idea that everything can be found in Wikipedia, searched in Google, or, as a last resort, crowdsourced through Reddit.

The comforts and technologies of today can indeed engender a sense of entitlement and laziness. But at the same time, they can also create new forms of responsibility. In this age of screenshots and virality, one learns early on to be responsible for what one posts in social media. In an age where teachers can easily check for plagiarism through search engines, one learns that simply relying on a quick Google search for assignments won’t impress anybody. Not anymore. So it always works both ways.

Similarly, while the virtual world may have greatly expanded, the internet has also allowed for an easier exploration of the real one: Traveling and going outdoors have gotten much easier. And while it has given rise to trolls and cyberbullies, it has also given voice to fact-checkers, real-life communities and support groups.

The challenge, then, is to maximize the good and mitigate the bad, of the technologies and trends we are faced with today. And, instead of blaming millennials for modernity’s problems, to think of how education can be responsive in a time of information overload and a dearth of critical thinking.

Throughout this piece, I’ve tried to defend millennials from unfair critique, but critique itself is most welcome. As a millennial myself, I think we need to be challenged more, and so by all means keep challenging us.

Someday, we will also realize our mistakes.

By then, perhaps we would have earned the right to lament the “decline” of the next generation.

Originally published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer: http://opinion.inquirer.net/106053/in-defense-of-millennials

A version of this article appeared in Thailand's The Nation: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30322924

[Second Opinion] End of the road for regular cabs?

by Gideon Lasco
Philippine Daily Inquirer

When President Duterte warned taxi drivers last year that not giving exact change to passengers amounted to estafa, he touched on one among a litany of grievances Filipinos have had about taxis. From getting turned down after flagging it down to having to fend off getting ripped off, just the thought of taking a cab can be stressful.

Of course, this is not to generalize; we are also occasionally regaled with tales of honest taxi drivers: In January, for example, Reggie Cabutotan of Baguio City returned a bag containing around P1 million to a very grateful Australian passenger. In this vein, I must commend the taxi drivers of Davao City, some of whom continue to give change down to the last peso.

Even so, many Filipinos have had negative experiences with taxis, which is why when Grab and Uber entered the market a few years ago, they had instant appeal. Simply put, these transport network companies (TNCs) took away the hailing and the haggling—that is, the hassle of getting a taxi.

What’s more, TNC drivers routinely use smartphone apps to come up with the fastest route to your exact destination, and having a nice car with good air-conditioning is a great bonus. Others also find their drivers more personable and professional—and narratives of these interactions can be found on Facebook. Finally, the more recent carpooling services (i.e., UberPool) make for more budget- and environment-friendly options.

But taxi operators weren’t amused, and formally protested their loss of income. They alleged that TNCs don’t pay taxes (a charge that the two companies vigorously denied), and blamed them for exacerbating the traffic in Metro Manila.

What taxi operators don’t realize, however, is they are losing business because of the aspects of quality transport in which they have failed, or which they have failed to offer. The thought of paying more than what one is supposed to, for instance, is generally annoying, no matter how cheap the actual and asking prices are. Competition (i.e., who provides the better services), and not the government, decides who wins.

***

As mobile internet access becomes more widespread, so will the popularity of Uber and Grab. For regular taxis to survive, they have to professionalize their workforce. The innovation of TNCs, after all, is not rethinking the role of the passengers, but that of the drivers, too: They generally earn more and have more control over their time—but they are also given a set of standards to follow, for which they are subject to passengers’ evaluation. Meanwhile, while taxi drivers are on the receiving end of our complaints, they are under psychological and financial pressure due to long working hours (some go for 24-hour runs) and the need to earn enough to make the “boundary.”

Regular taxis can also compete in areas where TNCs have weaknesses. For one, the waiting time is often understated: Two minutes can easily become 20—an excruciating wait if you’re running late. Because of their (over)dependence on technology, their services can go crazy when the internet connection goes awry. And there are times when they are too expensive, as when they do “surge pricing” during peak hours. If only taxis can offer a no-frills service with metered rates and good customer service, surely they will win (back) more passengers.

Ultimately, however, transport services—whether by regular taxis or TNCs—are only as good as the traffic situation, and while it’s better to be stuck in traffic in a nice car, you’re still stuck—and the predicament of how you can move from one place to another more efficiently remains. As urban planner Benjamin dela Peña has repeatedly pointed out, we have to think of transport not in terms of cars but of people; the long-term solution is not just better services or more roads, but mass transit and streets for walking and biking—all of which can complement one another.

And so while I will keep the ride-sharing apps in my smartphone, I will also hold out the hope that someday, there will be a faster, cheaper, and no less convenient alternative: public transport.

Originally published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on April 20, 2017: http://opinion.inquirer.net/103325/end-road-regular-cabs

What is a rant? Reflections on social media negativity

by Gideon Lasco

Ranting is such a common behavior nowadays that many rants are devoted to ranting. In our age when expressing one’s opinion is as easy as typing a few lines and pressing a button, no one wants to be called a ranter - or a whiner or a hater - but a lot of people actualy rant without acknowledging that they are, in fact, ranting. Thus many people, overwhelmed with the negativity, are distancing themselves from Facebook; while some go on a “social media holiday”. One of my friends has even deactivated his social media accounts completely, lamenting that the world has been ran over by a “generation of ranters.”

But what, exactly, is a rant? According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a rant is “to talk loudly and in a way that shows anger; to complain in a way that is unreasonable.” This definition is a good starting point, telling us that a rant is a way of communicating or complaining that is (1) loud (2) angry (3) unreasonable.

How can one be “loud” in social media? The most obvious is the lavish use of ALL CAPS, but there are other ways to be loud. Making use of a photo, for instance, makes one’s message “louder” - images can be very powerful and memes are the poetry of our time. Ranting goes for the dramatic, the sensational.

As for “anger”, we can easily see this with the choice of words. Curse-words - although their currency has been grossly inflated and they don’t have the same gravity anymore - are staple fare for rants. But a rant can also incite to anger by insulting others through witticisms, name-calling, or logical-sounding arguments. Directing the anger at someone also makes it more weighty (so-called “open letters”), and ranting is at its best when it is not just angry, but accusatory.

The crucial test of ranting, however, is whether something is “unreasonable” or not, and this is where its subjectivity lies. Many Filipinos won’t say that the Philippines is ranting about the Spartlys dispute - we would think that our claims are reasonable, and our anger warranted. Neither will many consider as mere “rants” the online posts expressing outrage over repressive regimes that gave rise to the Arab Spring. As these examples show, one man’s “rant” is another’s “grievance”.

Perhaps the non-confrontational attitude of Filipinos makes social media a particularly suitable venue to express our sentiments. Psychologist John Suler termed this the “online disinibition effect”, which draws from the sense of anonymity and distance to free people from their inhibitions, thinking that there will be little backlash for what they would say.

Rants are oftentimes signs of helplessness; people do not rant if they think there are other ways to communicate their message. Indeed, ranting satisfies the need to release one’s negative emotions, while at the same time offering the chance that the addressee would actually listen. On the other hand, oftentimes enmeshed in this need to communicate is a desire to get noticed by the social media universe; the desire to go viral. Thus instead of being a last resort, it becomes the first. Consequently, it feeds a culture of outrage, where attention is validation.

***

IN THE multitide of ideas and sentiments floated on social media, there are many ways to stand out. You can inspire people with beautiful pictures, enlighten them with a well-written thinkpiece, or make them laugh with your pet’s funny expressions. Psychological studies, however, have shown that “negative emotions are more contagious than positive ones”, as Finnish scholar Harri Jalonen puts in. This “negative bias” makes it understandable that many people resort to ranting.

The criteria for reason, however, should give us pause for what we label as “rants”. While some posts are clearly rants, there simply is no objective criteria we can apply for the “reasonability” of every post. During the APEC week, when people in Metro Manila were thrown into miserable traffic conditions, I observed that the people who experienced the traffic themselves “liked” and “shared” posts that gave voice to their predicament, while those living elsewhere were more likely to dismiss them as “rants”. This subjectivity of what constitutes a rant reminds us that in the act of labeling people's viewpoints (either as rants or “painful truths”; “whining” or “telling it like it is”), we engage our own ideologies, politics, and (limited) knowledge.

We should strive to move away from a “ranting culture” by delivering our messages in a way that does not incite people to more anger. If social media is social, then we must abide by social conventions: respecting others’ points of view, not taking different opinions personally, and if called for, arguing with reason, not with anger. And if social media is media, then we are all journalists now, and if we express outrage, we must do so with a committment to truth and fairness.

As for those who are in the receiving end of a rant, we should likewise exercise restraint - as well as an openness to what might actually be a valid argument. Dismissing something as a “rant” will only inflame its source. Ranting about a “rant”, like fighting fire with fire, is equally unhelpful. The cycle of ranting, ranting about ranting, and so on, ends when someone on the receiving end of a rant reads through the rant and tries instead to find out where it’s coming from.

Do we, then, need a new set of values - in this age of social media? I don’t think so. I think we just need to bring back the old ones - starting with humility.

Manila
December 11, 2015