Echoing what others have said, this is a great reflection on the online/offline conundrum.
The offline -> online -> offline reversal reminds me of the historical anecdote that pale skin used to be a class status symbol indicating wealth and freedom from manual outdoor labor. As the story goes, sunbathing rose to popularity in the 1920's as western societies moved from agricultural to factory labor and the working class was now indoors, while the upper class gained time for travel and a tan!
Has being chronically online burnt us and we're now looking for respite in the digital shade?
This reminds me of how a few years ago, the uncurated and nonchalant "photo dump" became a thing. Suddenly, after years of very intentional, stylised posts, it was cool to throw together a seemingly random, imperfect selection of photos to show that you, indeed, did not care and need not show up for your online audience. I feel like the first ones to do so have no graduated to trying to be offline.
'Selective friction' is interesting. So much tech is free because we are the product - bringing friction back into our lives actually requires more money and privilege than having the more 'advanced' versions of things (assuming a certain level of privilege to start with eg. Having a phone). Buying a notebook instead of using the notes app, getting photos printed instead of using free cloud storage, buying CDs instead of streaming for 'free' on Spotify. Dissessembling out digital lives into discreet parts that can be divorced from the digital realm (and in doing so escaping from being a product) is the true luxury.
Wonderful read, 100% agree, I have lived this approach for years; the irony of marketing others while quietly curating my life behind the scenes, taste and intelligence matters. Thankfully living in NYC offers a bounty of opportunities IRL that don’t mean online content all the time but curated experiences that lead to interesting new connections. There’s also a micro continuum here that can be applied generationally speaking as well, from zero to mid (engagement) in my opinion.
While I think a lot of this is accurate, there's also an inherent assumption that the one going offline still wants to know the "right" things to do. There's an increasing number of people who are just as disillusioned with the constant vibe-churn and being served a new aesthetic every week as they are with social media and the algorithm itself. Conscious disavowal of the online sphere can also function as a disavowal of the trend cycle in an effort to embrace, or even discover, what you like independent of what you "should" like.
I'm struggling to verbalize exactly where the disconnect lies, but there's a gap between being visibly offline as a version of cultural capital (while still remaining in-the-know/"cool") and the kind of virtual asceticism that I think is also appearing as a reaction to total online fatigue in favor of just doing dope analogue shit that makes you happy regardless of how it's viewed by anyone else.
Unless I misunderstand, and you're talking more about the Uber or Deliveroo algorithms rather than Substack or Instagram, isn't the "The rest of us are still grinding for algorithmic visibility because we don’t have another choice" line of thinking a bit of an overstatement? The vast majority of people, thriving or struggling, are making pretty much no attempt at algorithmic visibility no?
Sure we all live within cyberspace yada yada, but I just don't think we're at that point yet are we?
I believe he was referring to creatives or other occupations that hinge on popularity and haven’t gotten big enough before the current internet’s development. Think the young artists growing their career vs playboicarti or kanye.
Also the point about needing the algorithm’s recommendations.
Loved this piece, this is the type of “luxury” I want in my life. I am questioning tho the part where you say that you can’t influence culture/move the Overton window from a position of unplugged-ness. Isn’t this what was happening before the internet? The true trend setters were always hardly visible to the mainstream, often on the fringes or purposely hiding.
Great article. It ties in with growing events, real-life meet-ups being more popular. A chance to disconnect from online and to be yourself - almost the exact opposite of what the early web was for.
Yanis Varoufakis calls us “cloud serfs”. We actively engage, consume and refine these algorithms for these technocrats for free just for them to keep us addicted to their platforms and to sell us things we don’t need. Being chronically offline could be more mainstream as people start to realise is they crave in person community rather than online echo chambers
For some reason this piece made me think of when I was first told the theory that pet cats remain adolescent and never grow up properly. There is something about connectivity, influencers, social media, fitting in, that is reductive. Have we lost vive la difference? I think maybe we have. Or is there a whole world of gurus, artists, hermits out there, quite happy because the rest of us have lost the ability to either follow a path that leads to their door or create a own path?
This is such a great read! Thank you. It also overlaps closely with what I’m exploring in a soon-to-be-published magazine I’m working on, Quiet Media - especially questions around the balance between URL and IRL, and the relationship between consumption and creation.
Like this take and definitely think it’s related to increasingly blatant exploitation of online attention, slop, and how depressing being online is right now. But also wonder how much of it is simply millennials and Gen Z who made being extremely online cool aging out of the internet culture they created and younger generations not having resources/autonomy to carve out new horizons of it that are as impactful. It might look like a flex online but developing personal taste, solidifying a personal network around your lifestyle and interests are also factors of maturation. Regardless, it could still be a turning point. Internet culture may have peaked. If it never assumes the same capacity to transcending niche culture to create a kind of mass cool again (which is a very interesting provocation) what’s next?
This really lands, especially the difference between opting out and being able to opt out. In many time-dependent practices, slowness or partial invisibility isn’t a lifestyle choice, it’s a condition. Certain processes can’t be accelerated without collapsing.
What often gets missed is that this produces a different form of recognition altogether. Not recognition through codes or status, but recognition through shared instability. The sense that disorientation, interruption, and fragility are still inhabitable states. Where brand logic reassures by saying “people like us exist here,” these practices do something quieter and riskier: they suggest that people who are still reassembling themselves exist too.
That kind of recognition isn’t identity capital. It’s existential continuity. And it functions very differently from the privilege of simply being able to disappear.
Is it then impractical for the average person to be offline? I am inclined to advise everyone to be offline; but I did notice that when I was chronically offline, I was extremely isolated and lonely, as I did not have a robust enough network to socialise with on ordinary terms.
This resonates deeply. I deleted my personal IG account 5 years ago as I was feeling it gave me more distraction than actual value. And never missed it on a personal level tbh, I've always found ways to connect with people offline. But on a business level I find it hard to be fully offline, balancing the wish to be discovered vs. the wish to be offline... Thanks for the insights!
Echoing what others have said, this is a great reflection on the online/offline conundrum.
The offline -> online -> offline reversal reminds me of the historical anecdote that pale skin used to be a class status symbol indicating wealth and freedom from manual outdoor labor. As the story goes, sunbathing rose to popularity in the 1920's as western societies moved from agricultural to factory labor and the working class was now indoors, while the upper class gained time for travel and a tan!
Has being chronically online burnt us and we're now looking for respite in the digital shade?
Excellent parallel.
This reminds me of how a few years ago, the uncurated and nonchalant "photo dump" became a thing. Suddenly, after years of very intentional, stylised posts, it was cool to throw together a seemingly random, imperfect selection of photos to show that you, indeed, did not care and need not show up for your online audience. I feel like the first ones to do so have no graduated to trying to be offline.
'Selective friction' is interesting. So much tech is free because we are the product - bringing friction back into our lives actually requires more money and privilege than having the more 'advanced' versions of things (assuming a certain level of privilege to start with eg. Having a phone). Buying a notebook instead of using the notes app, getting photos printed instead of using free cloud storage, buying CDs instead of streaming for 'free' on Spotify. Dissessembling out digital lives into discreet parts that can be divorced from the digital realm (and in doing so escaping from being a product) is the true luxury.
Wonderful read, 100% agree, I have lived this approach for years; the irony of marketing others while quietly curating my life behind the scenes, taste and intelligence matters. Thankfully living in NYC offers a bounty of opportunities IRL that don’t mean online content all the time but curated experiences that lead to interesting new connections. There’s also a micro continuum here that can be applied generationally speaking as well, from zero to mid (engagement) in my opinion.
While I think a lot of this is accurate, there's also an inherent assumption that the one going offline still wants to know the "right" things to do. There's an increasing number of people who are just as disillusioned with the constant vibe-churn and being served a new aesthetic every week as they are with social media and the algorithm itself. Conscious disavowal of the online sphere can also function as a disavowal of the trend cycle in an effort to embrace, or even discover, what you like independent of what you "should" like.
I'm struggling to verbalize exactly where the disconnect lies, but there's a gap between being visibly offline as a version of cultural capital (while still remaining in-the-know/"cool") and the kind of virtual asceticism that I think is also appearing as a reaction to total online fatigue in favor of just doing dope analogue shit that makes you happy regardless of how it's viewed by anyone else.
Unless I misunderstand, and you're talking more about the Uber or Deliveroo algorithms rather than Substack or Instagram, isn't the "The rest of us are still grinding for algorithmic visibility because we don’t have another choice" line of thinking a bit of an overstatement? The vast majority of people, thriving or struggling, are making pretty much no attempt at algorithmic visibility no?
Sure we all live within cyberspace yada yada, but I just don't think we're at that point yet are we?
I believe he was referring to creatives or other occupations that hinge on popularity and haven’t gotten big enough before the current internet’s development. Think the young artists growing their career vs playboicarti or kanye.
Also the point about needing the algorithm’s recommendations.
Thats how I understood it anyway
Loved this piece, this is the type of “luxury” I want in my life. I am questioning tho the part where you say that you can’t influence culture/move the Overton window from a position of unplugged-ness. Isn’t this what was happening before the internet? The true trend setters were always hardly visible to the mainstream, often on the fringes or purposely hiding.
I don’t believe that is so for our current life, unless the people who are unplugged have access/power over those that are plugged in and popular.
Great article. It ties in with growing events, real-life meet-ups being more popular. A chance to disconnect from online and to be yourself - almost the exact opposite of what the early web was for.
Yanis Varoufakis calls us “cloud serfs”. We actively engage, consume and refine these algorithms for these technocrats for free just for them to keep us addicted to their platforms and to sell us things we don’t need. Being chronically offline could be more mainstream as people start to realise is they crave in person community rather than online echo chambers
For some reason this piece made me think of when I was first told the theory that pet cats remain adolescent and never grow up properly. There is something about connectivity, influencers, social media, fitting in, that is reductive. Have we lost vive la difference? I think maybe we have. Or is there a whole world of gurus, artists, hermits out there, quite happy because the rest of us have lost the ability to either follow a path that leads to their door or create a own path?
Red pill or blue pill?
What happens when everyone starts trying to achieve the same thing? The goal post moves.
This is such a great read! Thank you. It also overlaps closely with what I’m exploring in a soon-to-be-published magazine I’m working on, Quiet Media - especially questions around the balance between URL and IRL, and the relationship between consumption and creation.
Keen to hear about this!
you can read my intro here! would love to know what you think. https://substack.com/home/post/p-186119509
Like this take and definitely think it’s related to increasingly blatant exploitation of online attention, slop, and how depressing being online is right now. But also wonder how much of it is simply millennials and Gen Z who made being extremely online cool aging out of the internet culture they created and younger generations not having resources/autonomy to carve out new horizons of it that are as impactful. It might look like a flex online but developing personal taste, solidifying a personal network around your lifestyle and interests are also factors of maturation. Regardless, it could still be a turning point. Internet culture may have peaked. If it never assumes the same capacity to transcending niche culture to create a kind of mass cool again (which is a very interesting provocation) what’s next?
This really lands, especially the difference between opting out and being able to opt out. In many time-dependent practices, slowness or partial invisibility isn’t a lifestyle choice, it’s a condition. Certain processes can’t be accelerated without collapsing.
What often gets missed is that this produces a different form of recognition altogether. Not recognition through codes or status, but recognition through shared instability. The sense that disorientation, interruption, and fragility are still inhabitable states. Where brand logic reassures by saying “people like us exist here,” these practices do something quieter and riskier: they suggest that people who are still reassembling themselves exist too.
That kind of recognition isn’t identity capital. It’s existential continuity. And it functions very differently from the privilege of simply being able to disappear.
Is it then impractical for the average person to be offline? I am inclined to advise everyone to be offline; but I did notice that when I was chronically offline, I was extremely isolated and lonely, as I did not have a robust enough network to socialise with on ordinary terms.
This resonates deeply. I deleted my personal IG account 5 years ago as I was feeling it gave me more distraction than actual value. And never missed it on a personal level tbh, I've always found ways to connect with people offline. But on a business level I find it hard to be fully offline, balancing the wish to be discovered vs. the wish to be offline... Thanks for the insights!