Reading about someone’s tattoo artist, keeping up with current world events, discovering a car heaven in Japan, or learning more about healthy and affordable food, we can do this through the digital world. People from all over the world are able to gain access to the digital, due to it being accessible through various means (e.g. cell phones, computers or tv). While there can be some constraints on information or the digital world in general (e.g. cybersecurity policy), most information in the digital space can be (relatively easily) found. The digital world should thus be a great candidate for being our ‘World Brain’, which is “(… ) a concentration, which will assemble, co-ordinate and distribute accumulated knowledge.”¹ However, I think that the digital space cannot be our ‘World Brain’, which is primarily due to our contribution and engagement with it.

“A world encyclopaedia no longer presents itself to a modern imagination as a row of volumes printed and published once for all, but as a sort of mental clearing house for the mind, a depot where knowledge and ideas are received, sorted, summarized, digested, clarified and compared.”

H. G. Wells²

People’s contribution to knowledge

The primary reason why I think that the digital world is not suitable to be our ‘World Brain’, is due to the excessive amount of low-quality and misinformation. Many digital spaces with a lot of input and engagement of netizens, do not have high-quality information. In this digital age, where many have access to and are in the digital on a daily basis, it is very easy to contribute something to it. This is not necessarily a good thing, because with so many netizens, there will be a lot of low-quality information as a result.

Some people also contribute something to the digital for personal gain, which can take shape in someone trying to go viral, making a living out of it, or selling an online course. Many will try to reach their target group through many methods (e.g. participating in current trends), but the most important thing is to keep getting exposure out to people that can result in more engagement and fame. This contribution to the digital space does not belong in a ‘World Brain’.

Our engagement with the digital

The meaning of something can change, depending on how we engage with it, which is also true for the digital world. However, due to the substantial various amount of activities, the digital has many places with a different structure, purpose and engagement. These can change depending on the needs of its users. If we look at TikTok and Instagram for example, we can see that due to the popularity of the short videos on TikTok, Instagram Reels were made (YouTube Shorts also has the same origin). Different social media platform are thus adapting based on their target group and slowly having similar activities. These platform are often well-known and popular amongst netizens.

Many digital spaces are also made to keep the user engaged, which can (if successful) result in negative consequences of the user’s mental and even cognitive well-being, that is reinforced by the substantial amount of time spent in the digital.³ This is also known as ‘Brain Rot’, which can have many forms. The information we often expose ourselves to in these spaces is often low-quality, thus unsuitable for a ‘World Brain’.

Conclusion

While the basis of a modern organization of Well’s ‘World Brain’ has been somewhat achieved, there are still many difficulties primarily due to our contribution and engagement with it. The structure, purpose and engagement of many digital spaces have been shaped by and for us, with no intent of establishing a ‘World Brain’. We give to and take an excessive amount of low-quality information from the digital world, which is detrimental for establishing a ‘World Brain’.

While many digital spaces are definitely not suitable to be our ‘World Brain’, there do exist many digital spaces that act as databases of knowledge, “where knowledge can be received, sorted, summarized, digested, clarified and compared.”⁴ There is thus still hope for (some) the digital space(s) to serve as our ‘World Brain’, but these spaces have to be established with the ‘World Brain’ in mind.

“He (the specialist) can increase knowledge, but without a modern organization backing him he cannot put it over.”

H. G. Wells⁵

---

1. Wells, H. G., 2021. 52. ↩︎
2. Wells, H. G., 2021. 50. ↩︎
3. Newport Institute, 2024. ↩︎
4. Wells, H. G., 2021. 50. ↩︎
5. Wells, H. G., 2021. 49. ↩︎

Bibliography

• GXT Plays, “Futurama: Aliens spreading misinformation on internet.,” YouTube Video, September 5, 2023, 58 seconds, https://youtu.be/49OKD0TDuWQ?si=kp7Nbz-BSLXADtKY.
• Kurtis Conner, “Chronically Online,” YouTube Video, August 26, 2022, 25 min., 36 sec., https://youtu.be/Zh_m3OzUhcY?feature=shared.
• Newport Institute (2024). “Brain Rot: The Impact on Young Adult Mental Health,” Newport Institute, January 10. https://www.newportinstitute.com/resources/co-occurring-disorders/brain-rot/.
• Nieset, Lane. 2018. “Meet Thailand’s tattoo master,” National Geographic, November 16. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/where-to-go-thai-tattoo-cultural-significance-master.
• Wells, H. G. (Herbert George). World Brain. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2021.
• ShotasPOV. 2023. “I spent a day in Japan‘s INSANE CAR HEAVEN (Real life Tokyo Drift!),” YouTube Short, 35 seconds. https://youtube.com/shorts/Pk5zzPdSQrc?si=PgRgSl4osrcn5W_V.