Who's Got Brain Rot?

Draft script:

You probably know that the Oxford Word of the Year for 2024 is Brain Rot. This story has been reported in many corporate media outlets. I’ll quote from MSN in an article posted 2 December 2024. Titled ‘Brain rot’ named Oxford word of the year for 2024, here’s the lede: “It's 2024, so even if you haven’t yet heard about the new Word of the Year, chances are you probably have experienced it.” The next paragraph is comprised of a single sentence: “Brain rot.”

The story continues. On 2 December 2024, “Oxford University Press -- the publishing house of the University of Oxford -- announced that ‘brain rot’ is the 2024 Word of the Year after more than 37,000 votes and an analysis of its use, particularly online.”

If you’re not already irritated, perhaps the following four paragraphs will do the trick. I will be using direct quotes from the article within these four paragraphs, and I apologize for the awkwardness in doing so:

“In announcing the news, editors said experts realized that the concept of brain rot was growing in ‘prominence this year as a term used to capture concerns about the impact of consuming excessive amounts of low-quality online content, especially on social media.’

Oxford University Press editors said the term increased in usage frequency by 230% between 2023 and 2024, and they particularly noted that it was something being promoted heavily this year on TikTok, too.

The University of Oxford, which has been teaching English words and how to use them since as early as 1096, defined the concept of brain rot as: ‘(n.) Supposed deterioration of a person’s mental or intellectual state, especially viewed as a result of overconsumption of material (now particularly online content) considered to be trivial or unchallenging. Also: something characterized as likely to lead to such deterioration.’”

I’m irritated for several reasons. First, and this one is particularly noteworthy considering the source, we have the famous Oxford University Press announcing a phrase as the word of the year. Brain rot is two words, not one. The two words are brain and rot. How could a two-word phrase be named the word of the year?

Next up, we have “more than 37,000 votes and an analysis of its use, particularly online.” First, I don’t care if there were 37 million votes. You still cannot convince me that a phrase is a word. Quantity is no measure of quality, regardless how many people agree. Second, “particularly online”? When did online usage become a measure of quality? Have you seen the nonsense posted online?

This very idea brings to mind a short story from a friend and colleague at the University of Arizona. This Professor had a student in his office to discuss an assignment. The Professor asked where the student was finding the information he used to write a long paper. The student, holding several pieces of typed work, responded with, “It’s on the Internet.”

The Professor used his foot to slide his garbage can toward the student as he said, “that belongs in here.”

This was a long time ago, and—even then—the Internet contained useful information. However, the unquestioned use of material from any source is not a good idea. Again, I return to the second of four paragraphs in the article at MSN: “Oxford University Press editors said the term increased in usage frequency by 230% between 2023 and 2024, and they particularly noted that it was something being promoted heavily this year on TikTok, too.

Oh, my: “the term increased in usage frequency by 230% between 2023 and 2024.” At least the Oxford University Press correctly called the term brain rot a term this time, instead of a word. But, again, the increase “in usage frequency by 230% between 2023 and 2024” is not compelling, at least to me. My consumption of ice cream increased by 230% from Monday to Tuesday of last week because we ran out of ice cream in this house on Sunday. A couple of days were required to overcome this error.

Oh, my, again: “[the term] … was being promoted heavily this year on TikTok.” The editors at the renowned Oxford University Press have been swayed by TikTok? Perhaps I should visit TikTok, after all. Apparently, it’s the social media trendsetter.

By the way, the editors at Oxford University Press admit that the so-called word of the year is not new. In fact, as pointed out in the article at MSN, the word was first recorded in Henry David Thoreau’s Walden, published in 1854: “While England endeavors to cure the potato rot, will not any endeavor to cure the brain-rot -- which prevails so much more widely and fatally?”

The bottom line in the article at MSN comes in the final paragraph: “Now, Oxford editors say, the same term has ‘taken on new significance in the digital age,’ noting that ‘brain rot’ enjoys widespread use even in mainstream journalism as society expresses unease today on the effect of its overconsumption of digital content.”

This is supposed to make the reader feel better? The idea that “society expresses unease today on the effect of its overconsumption of digital content” is something to celebrate? Many times, I have expressed unease about my tax dollars funding military actions, including the committing of war crimes. I have similarly expressed my unease about the existence of billionaires in a society wracked by disparity. Perhaps you’re familiar with a famous line from American writer John Steinbeck: “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

Today, of course, the proper word to end this phrase is billionaires, not millionaires. Inflation has consequences.