Do You Work Free For The Tech Lords?

[PeterRS]

That is the statement made today in an article in The Guardian newspaper. The full detailed quote is - 

Some of us have always been Instagram and Facebook refuseniks, and never publicly posted pictures of our lives or families or any of it. But it’s not the norm, and billions of people have entirely forgivably got sucked into a world where they are the product, where they work for free for the tech lords, who successfully devalued the idea of privacy at the altar of their big lie: that “being connected” via their networks is far more important than privacy; that it is a win for humanity; that it is social. But it isn’t. Societies are in a mess. Literacy’s in a mess. Young people’s mental health is in a mess. The world’s in far more of a mess than it was when the techlords found it.

The quote comes at the end of an article which illustrates the fate of one prominent British family who sold out to the tech world from the start and have lived their lives in the full glare of the world's gaze - deliberately. Now their 26 year old eldest son has virtually excoriated them and said he will never have anything to do with them ever again. His parents engagement was 'sold' to the media. Their marriage photos exclusively 'sold' to one magazine. Their first son's emergence as a foetus was 'sold'. They 'sold' photos of their home, and of their young son's nursery. Everything in their lives became a commodity. As did the brand they were creating as the perfect family.

That family is named Beckham. Specifically Sir David and Lady Victoria Beckham. 30 years ago he was a prodigiously talented soccer player who would go on to become one of the best ever produced by England. Everyone in the country was soon talking about him. He then became engaged to a young aspiring fashion designer who had been a member of the hugely popular group, The Spice Glrls. . After their glitzy royal-style wedding, they went on honeymoon to New York where their first son was conceived. They told the world they'd name him Brooklyn. Odd name, you'd think, but they added "because he was conceived there." Just what the world wanted to know, I don't think!

When social media came along, they embraced it in every possible way. In particular at ever turn they preached family love. Their staff ensured that photos were placed here, there and everywhere with that love abundantly clear. They were paid fees for as many photos as possible. Their brand was love and family.  After soccer, David developed this brand in various ways. One was to assist now King Charles with his charity, The Prince's Trust. Around the time of the Olympics in London in 2012, he seemed to be everywhere. Meanwhile, thanks perhaps - just maybe! - his wife's fashion business was taking off. The couple is now estimated to be worth £500 million.

But as the article writer points out, while "alchemically lucrative", their life was an "accident waiting to happen." Recently it did. Brooklyn went ballistic in a series of instagram posts accusing his parents of treating him like a commodity all his life and doing everything they could to prevent his marriage. In 2022 he had married a rich aspiring American actress whose father is a billionaire, Nicola Peltz. He and her brothers are devout Jews but her mother is not. Beckham Junior accused his parents of doing their best to derail his wedding - his mother of cancelling his future wife's wedding dress at the last minute, and then of insisting at the reception that he dance the first dance with her and  not as is customary with his new bride. He added his parents pressured him into signing away the rights to his name, something he adamantly refused to do. His father also refused to see him on a visit to Los Angeles. He now goes by the name Brooklyn Peltz Beckham.

The author believes the Beckhams have become so lost in the world of social media they do not know how else to live their lives - 

the only truly credible explanation for why they continue to live their life so remorselessly out loud is because they still crave the attention. And, realistically, because they have forgotten how else to live.

And where is Sir David now? Where else but at the World Economic Forum in Davos mingling with world leaders, yesterday lecturing how children are "allowed to make mistakes." Naturally the brand must be repaired and continue. He was well aware his speech had been circulated and would again appear on social media. Forget the wayward son was the unwritten message. The tech lords must ensure the Beckhams' brand remains important. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/20/brooklyn-peltz-beckham-inc-disaster-david-victoria

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3ekq4z5dyo

[jimmie50]

Up until today, I had not followed the story about Brooklyn's Instagram posts.  As I have stated in numerous posts on this forum, I am not a fan of social media, nor do I have accounts at Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.   I use Line primarily for communication with folks in Thailand.  I will also use WhatsApp (I know...now owned by Meta/Facebook), but only as a last resort.  I have two online forums I visit...one occasionally but rarely post because of the toxic environment...the other is this one which I post often and really enjoy.  I really agree with this statement.  

...billions of people have entirely forgivably got sucked into a world where they are the product, where they work for free for the tech lords, who successfully devalued the idea of privacy at the altar of their big lie: that “being connected” via their networks is far more important than privacy; that it is a win for humanity; that it is social. But it isn’t. Societies are in a mess. Literacy’s in a mess. Young people’s mental health is in a mess. The world’s in far more of a mess than it was when the techlords found it.

I actually started to read the news articles that shared some of Brooklyn's post because of the comment made by David Beckham.  His comment that children are allowed to make mistakes certainly seems to imply that fault lies with Brooklyn and his posts are the mistake...not anything David or Victoria has done.  Would be interesting to know what their other children think about the posts.   I also found it interesting that a former employee of David's who claimed they had an affair back in 2004.  Of course, he denied the affair.  Her response at that time to his denial was that he was “trying to portray an image of perfection that was nothing like reality.”   Her comment regarding Brooklyn's post was very interesting: “Fascinating admission from Brooklyn,” the 48-year-old replied alongside a red heart, “The truth always comes out.”

[caeron]

I don't do Facebook anymore, and won't do instragram. I miss out on some stuff, but I think it worth it to not have my life online sold to whoever will pay Meta for the data.

[Keithambrose]

1 minute ago, caeron said:

I don't do Facebook anymore, and won't do instragram. I miss out on some stuff, but I think it worth it to not have my life online sold to whoever will pay Meta for the data.

I manage well, without being on any of these.

[PeterRS]

The mental health issues resulting from social media are particularly worrying with children and young teens, several of whom have killed themselves as a result of some form of on-line grooming. Interesting that governments are finally taking some action. Australia recently announced a ban on under-16s unsing social media, and this has caused quite a storm in the country. Denmark and Norway are likely to jump on that bandwagon with the age being either 15 or 16. There is also discussion in France, Spain. Italy, Greece and Malaysia.

https://www.euronews.com/next/2025/12/23/which-european-countries-are-considering-banning-social-media-for-children

[Ruthrieston]

I am another person who has never taken part in the social media stuff and I wouldn't touch facebook. People's addiction to their telephones is becoming addictive and dangerous. So often I have seen young families sitting in a restaurant having dinner with a phone propped up in front of the baby, the four or five year old watching his phone and the parents also just watching their phones and not talking to each other or their children at all. That is all so unhealthy, and so sad to see. 

[PeterRS]

This being glued to phones is extremely anti-social in the worst possible sense. Those who do so have started to live in some kind of parallel universe that is so unreal. 

Yet as I continue to rant against social media, I sometimes wonder if there is in fact much difference beween today and my childhood aeons ago. We lived mostly in small communities. Telephone calls were expensive and so we tended to mix in our own smallish social circles. International calls were almost unheard of and had to be booked in advance. The reason? For much of the 1960s the UK only had 3,000 international telephone lines and half these were reserved for the banking sector! For news we depended on the BBC whose words we treated as gospel. Newspapers offered a degree of variety but were we really aware that they were owned by private interests putting forward essentially personal views - Beaverbrook, Roy Thomson and others in the UK; Hearst, the Newhouse Group, Henry Luce and now Murdoch and others elsewhere.

Is it in broad terms more or less the same but on a world stage? Although i dislike even suggesting it, it sometimes seems so.

[unicorn]

Well, I guess he married a billionaire, so he doesn't need to care about his inheritance. 😉

[Keithambrose]

7 hours ago, PeterRS said:

The mental health issues resulting from social media are particularly worrying with children and young teens, several of whom have killed themselves as a result of some form of on-line grooming. Interesting that governments are finally taking some action. Australia recently announced a ban on under-16s unsing social media, and this has caused quite a storm in the country. Denmark and Norway are likely to jump on that bandwagon with the age being either 15 or 16. There is also discussion in France, Spain. Italy, Greece and Malaysia.

https://www.euronews.com/next/2025/12/23/which-european-countries-are-considering-banning-social-media-for-children

And the UK. House of Lords just inserted a ban in a Government bill going through  parliament.  It will be removed when the bill goes back to the House of Commons, as the Government  say they are going  to make their own proposals.

[PeterRS]

2 hours ago, unicorn said:

Well, I guess he married a billionaire, so he doesn't need to care about his inheritance. 😉

The issue has nothing to do with his inheritance.

[jimmie50]

11 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Australia recently announced a ban on under-16s unsing social media, and this has caused quite a storm in the country. Denmark and Norway are likely to jump on that bandwagon with the age being either 15 or 16. There is also discussion in France, Spain. Italy, Greece and Malaysia.

Personally, I am in full agreement and support of these bans for children and youth under 16.  Coming from the education field, I would walk across campus and observe students sitting across from each other completely engaged with their phones...texting the person sitting directly across from them!!!   They don't know how to have actual conversations with each other or how to communicate without their devices.  Like @Ruthrieston, I go out to eat with friends (my age) and see young families sitting at a table all with phones in hand.  There is no casual family conversation taking place.  Just scanning social media, playing games, texting or what have you.  They don't even bother to look at each other.  No eye contact except with the screen.  So sad.  

[caeron]

I used to think differently and enjoy social media, but its steady creep and increasingly toxic nature changed my mind.

I was on the internet back when it was the arpanet. I loved it. When the internet started to take off, I imagined a bright, bright future. 

I was wrong.

[Latbear4blk]

Do You Work Free For The Tech Lords?

We all do, whether or not we like it. They are not the Tech Lords any longer. They own the world.

[unicorn]

8 hours ago, PeterRS said:

The issue has nothing to do with his inheritance.

What I meant is that he can criticize his parents all he wants, without worrying about his financial security should his parents disinherit him.

[unicorn]

17 hours ago, PeterRS said:

... Australia recently announced a ban on under-16s unsing social media...

Once you sing something, how can you unsing it? 😉