|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Toronto supported by WikiProject Wikipedia and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.|
I know this may not be the correct location for this but as an article on information ‘overload’ it gives no hint or direction as to how someone experiencing it may elevate it? (Even temporally) – Devan
Toffler didn't coin the term, and the phenomenon predates the Net
I did a little work on the first paragraph. Toffler popularized the term, but it had been coined earlier. The earliest I can find is in a book by Bertram Gross, which I have cited.
The article makes it sound as if info overload is an Internet Age idea. It's not. It comes straight out of the Information Age. I've added a brief reference to the idea's origins in the sensory overload trope.
This article does need some serious work, though. And, much as I love Clay Shirky, don't you think that having a section pointing to one of his wise aphorisms is a little out of place? dweinberger (talk) 05:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Historical context of information overload
I see information overload that could be further examined throughout history in society and propose a historical section in the article. I have an interest in seeing the phenomenon recurring as new forms of information technology affect information overload. ST2526 (talk) 11:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- I have added a history section with some sub-sections. Please feel free to suggest any changes. There are likely other examples of information overload associated with each new innovation in production of information or communications within the library and information science literature (i.e., Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society ~1665) but I can not locate the references. ST2526 (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
The below paragraph, in how to deal with IO chapter, appears to fall out of context, I suggest it's removed.
Attention Philanthropy is considered to be a gift of notice  that is “focused on shining a light on work that’s worth supporting, yet falls outside the notice of the usual sources of funding or acclaim.” It places an importance on money, but more important than the money is the exposure and the attention for good initiatives. In the midst of all the initiatives that are created, there is an emphasis placed on the “little guy.” Attention Philanthropy does face some difficulties. For example, certain initiatives can turn into popularity contests where feel-good ideas are supported. That is not to say that these initiatives are bad but that a popularity contest between initiatives don’t guarantee the effectiveness of the initiative. The desired outcome of attention philanthropy is to “increase the flow of world-changing projects and people into the system... [and] connect the mainstream to the leading waves of innovation and speeding the uptake of good ideas throughout society.” 18.104.22.168 (talk) 05:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Merge with Data Smog?
I propose that Data_Smog be merged into this article. Data smog is a very similar term and its article is mostly about one book so it would be easy to be included in this article. There is also some information overload specific stuff (the Bucy quote) that isn't found here. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 16:41, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
- Good idea. My one reservation is that Data Smog is an article about a specific book. I'll add a link to the See also section for now. Paul2520 (talk) 15:42, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
As a general-public-casual-reader, I dare say History section may be improved by mentioning means of conveying information other than the written e.g. radio, television, signage, advertising. It strikes me as odd the long jump from XVIIIth century book publishing to internet, obviating altogether XIXth century and proliferation of newspapers, journals, magazines, almanacs. As relevant comment from this period I would point to mind attic theory from massively influential master of information processing Sherlock Holmes :) What I was musing about when first came to this article was the perplexing relation between the necessity of perfect information as to market efficiency and the unperfecting infoverload mature markets seem to downpour. Wonder this could be something linked to Tainter's diminishing returns from complexity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)