Los chico(a)s de la generacion Internet estan bien !

INTERNET/PIB

Nov 13th 2008 The kids are alright The net generation

Jupiter Images Web wizards.

WORRIES about the damage the internet may be doing to young people has produced a mountain of books—a suitably old technology in which to express concerns about the new. Robert Bly claims that, thanks to the internet, the "neo-cortex is finally eating itself". Today's youth may be web-savvy, but they also stand accused of being unread, bad at communicating, socially inept, shameless, dishonest, work-shy, narcissistic and indifferent to the needs of others. The man who christened the "net generation" in his 1997 bestseller, "Growing Up Digital", has no time for such views. In the past two years, Don Tapscott has overseen a $4.5m study of nearly 8,000 people in 12 countries born between 1978 and 1994. In "Grown Up Digital" he uses the results to paint a portrait of this generation that is entertaining, optimistic and convincing. The problem, he suspects, is not the net generation but befuddled baby-boomers, who once sang along with Bob Dylan that "something is happening here, but you don't know what it is", yet now find that they are clueless about the revolutionary changes taking place among the young. "As the first global generation ever, the Net Geners are smarter, quicker and more tolerant of diversity than their predecessors," Mr Tapscott argues. "These empowered young people are beginning to transform every institution of modern life." They care strongly about justice, and are actively trying to improve society—witness their role in the recent Obama campaign, in which they organised themselves through the internet and mobile phones and campaigned on YouTube. Mr Tapscott's prescient chapter on "The Net Generation and Democracy: Obama, Social Networks and Citizen Engagement" alone should ensure his book a wide readership. Contrary to the claims that video games, Facebook and constant text-messaging have robbed today's young of the ability to think, Mr Tapscott believes that "Net Geners" are the "smartest generation ever". The experience of parents who grew up watching television is misleading when it comes to judging the 20,000 hours on the internet and 10,000 hours playing video games already spent by a typical 20-year-old American today. "The Net Generation is in many ways the antithesis of the TV generation," he argues. One-way broadcasting via television created passive couch potatoes, whereas the net is interactive, and, he says, stimulates and improves the brain. There is growing neuroscientific support for this claim. People who play video games, for example, have been found to process complex visual information more quickly. They may also be better at multi-tasking than earlier generations, which equips them better for the modern world. Mr Tapscott identifies eight norms that define Net Geners, which he believes everyone should take on board to avoid being swept away by the sort of generational tsunami that helped Barack Obama beat John McCain. Net Geners norms: They value freedom and choice in everything they do. They love to customise and personalise. They scrutinise everything. They demand integrity and openness, including when deciding what to buy and where to work. They want entertainment and play in their work and education, as well as their social life. They love to collaborate. They expect everything to happen fast. They expect constant innovation. These patterns have important implications for the workplace. Employers who ban the use of Facebook in the office—the equivalent of forbidding older staff to use their rolodexes—show clear signs of being out of touch, he argues. Two out of three Net Geners feel that "working and having fun can and should be the same thing". That does not mean they want to play games all day, but that they want the work itself to be enjoyable. They also expect collaboration, constant feedback and rapid career advancement based on merit. How they will react to being fired en masse as the downturn worsens remains to be seen, but Mr Tapscott suspects they will take it in their stride. Two things do worry Mr Tapscott. One is the inadequacy of the education system in many countries; while two-thirds of Net Geners will be the smartest generation ever, the other third is failing to achieve its potential. Here the fault is the education, not the internet, which needs to be given a much bigger role in classrooms (real and virtual). The second is the net generation's lack of any regard for personal privacy, which Mr Tapscott says is a "serious mistake, and most of them don't realise it." Already, posting pictures of alcohol fuelled parties, let alone mentioning drug use or other intimate matters, is causing a growing number of job applicants to fail the "reference test" as employers trawl Facebook and MySpace for clues about the character and behaviour of potential employees. More optimistically, the Net Geners are much more positive than their predecessors about their family. Half of those interviewed regard at least one parent as their "hero". Mr Tapscott believes the internet is producing an improved, more collaborative version of family life, which he calls the "open family". Parents increasingly recognise that their youngsters have digital expertise they lack but want to tap, and also that their best defence against their children falling foul of the dark side of the internet, such as online sexual predators, is to win their children's trust through honest conversation. Ironically, Mr Tapscott's recommended "platform" for this essential social networking could hardly be more old tech: the family dinner table.

Open article at "The Economist" Web Site

Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2007. All rights reserved. Legal disclaimer Privacy policy Terms & Conditions

Sección de Recetas Clasificadas. NYT.

Nueva sección clasificada de recetas en el Sitio Web del New York Times. Noviembre !5, 2008.       Hagan "click" aquí, o sobre la imagen para ir al Sitio Web de recetas clasificadas del NYT. Saludos, Vicente A. Aragón D.

Amigos y "amigos" en el trabajo.

NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Friends and "Friends" at Work TEXT BY MATT VILLANO The delicate balance of friendship and professionalism ILLUSTRATION BY KOREN SHADMI For Doug Roberts, one freaky Friday in New York changed the way he interacted with colleagues forever. The New York Yankees were home, and Roberts was heading to (the late, great) Yankee Stadium for a night game with some friends. After disembarking the No. 4 subway train, the group passed through the turnstiles, climbed the ramps to their seats, and downed beer after beer while they watched another Yankee victory. Outside the park, Roberts, who was then a sales executive for an education technology company, ran into a gaggle of colleagues on the street. Chitchat ensued, and the groups merged, wandering into a nearby bowling alley to throw some frames. While the group bowled, beer continued to flow. The night ended around 3 a.m. The following Monday, back at the office, things got weird. For starters, Roberts' colleagues were far too chummy for a professional setting, calling him "Dougy" and slapping him on the back. Then, in the middle of a business meeting, one of the colleagues whipped out a story about Roberts' drunken behavior at the bowling alley. "She was telling everyone, 'Wow, you guys should have seen Doug Friday night--he was screaming at people he didn't even know,'" recalls Roberts, who now works for a different education technology company, Synaptic Mash. "It was like she was ratting on me to all of these people who knew me as someone completely different." Looking back, Roberts says he was victimized by colleagues who overestimated their place in his circle of friends. He certainly is not alone; as many of us spend more and more time at work--most studies say the average American works just over 40 hours each week--many of us are susceptible to experiencing the same problems. Indeed, the evolution from work friend to close friend is a delicate transformation that usually raises more questions than it answers. How do we know when shared experiences equal true friendship? How do we know when it's appropriate to be chummy? Perhaps most important, how do we balance friendships with people with whom we are supposed to be professional? "It's a slippery slope," says Jennifer Kahnweiler, president of aboutYOU, a consulting firm in Atlanta. "No matter how comfortable you might feel with someone at work, you always need to remember that in the workplace, work always comes first." Benefits of work friends On the surface, having friends at work can be worthwhile. Statistics from the 2006 American Time Use Survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate the average American works 8.2 hours a day--more time than we do anything other than sleeping (which averages 7.6 hours). After all of this time at work, Jan Mitchell Johnson, president of GrantsFormation, a one-woman grant-writing and consulting firm in Houston, says forming personal relationships can be a welcome indulgence. "Think about it--we all spend more time at work than we do with our significant others," says Johnson, who estimates she has made "dozens" of friendships with colleagues and clients she has met through work. "It's perfectly natural to want to make the very most of those relationships." Johnson adds that friendships in the workplace also can provide a network of security when life gets in the way. Let's say you unexpectedly have to pick up the kids, you need to ditch out on a meeting to run an errand or you have to call in sick. Colleagues you consider to be friends are far more likely to fill in and help out than those who are just acquaintances. Of course co-workers with genuine friendships also can enhance the workplace and the quality of work. Recent research from Gallup shows that close friendships at work boost employee satisfaction by almost 50 percent. Los Angeles-based television producer Danielle Weinstock appreciates this kind of data. Weinstock has worked on shows such as "24," "Weeds," and "Crossing Jordan," and says that one of the best things about establishing personal relationships with people she works with is that she gets to know them on a deeper level and tailors her workplace persona accordingly. "The more you know about someone at work, the better you can motivate them, understand them, and communicate with them," says Weinstock, who generally works on a freelance basis. "Identifying someone's strengths and weaknesses can be good for everyone, including your employer." Careful what you wish for Still, friendships don't always make work easier; in some cases, they actually can cause employees to overlook bad behavior. Roughly 31 percent of U.S. workers have witnessed co-workers engaging in unethical conduct, according to a 2005 survey on workplace ethics by Hudson, a professional staffing firm in New York. Of 2,099 survey respondents who witnessed unethical or illegal acts, only half of them reported it to someone in authority. Friendships at work can create other potential pitfalls, too. As with any relationship, over-sharing could leave you at risk for getting hurt. But because work is all about career development, positing too much trust in a colleague ultimately could put you at risk for more than just smarting feelings--it could impact your ability to accomplish goals. Alan Allard, an executive coach in Lawrenceville, Ga., says that as an independent contractor, he's been in this situation a number of times. "The moment a friend starts taking you for granted in a professional capacity, it becomes hard to say, 'Back off,'" says Allard. "When you work for a big company, it's easy to say, 'Work comes first.' But when it's just you, everything becomes a lot trickier." As a freelance writer, I've experienced this quandary first-hand. I recently agreed to write an article for an editor friend. To put it bluntly, he hated my work. Under normal circumstances, I would have accepted a kill fee for the thwarted effort and called it a day. But in this case, because the editor was such a buddy, I felt obligated to bend over backwards and rewrite the story six times. Sure, I salvaged the story and saved our relationship. But the effort meant that, on an hourly basis, I made only 10 percent of my normal rate--definitely not the way to run a profitable business long-term. Flaunting friendships at work also can alienate those on the outside looking in. Philip Shaw, creative director at Golden Lasso, a 15-person advertising firm in Seattle, learned this the hard way. Earlier this decade, Shaw became so friendly with two or three other top executives at the firm that at least one of the firm's employees started referring to him and his buddies as the "Axis of Evil." The situation got so intense that Shaw eventually had to call a meeting to address the complaints head-on. "These comments became detrimental to our overall culture," he remembers, looking back. "I didn't think we were the 'Axis of Evil,' but hearing those comments forced me to take a closer look at how my actions were being interpreted by others across the board, and that's never a bad thing." Manage perceptions So what are some good ways to manage friendships at work? Most experts suggest that the best approaches are to manage perceptions and be wary. In cases like Shaw's, instances where you are in fact legitimately friendly with a colleague, get that friendship out into the open so none of your colleagues (or subordinates) can accuse you of favoritism. Kahnweiler, the consultant in Atlanta, says that in the workplace, even if you've known someone for years, everybody should have to play by the same rules. "When you're in an office situation, you're not giving favors or excusing someone coming late to a meeting because the person is your friend and you know he has trouble getting places on time," she says. "You want people to see you as fair, because fairness leads to credibility and that's what all of us should strive for in the first place." And in those cases where you're developing relationships with colleagues, remember there's a difference between close friends who will be there for you through life's tough times and people you hang out with while you happen to be stuck in the same building, at work. To determine what kind of friendships we have with our colleagues, Alexandra Levit, author of How'd You Score That Gig? A Guide to the Coolest Careers and How to Get Them, offers these questions: If the person left the company, would you still be in touch with her in a year? If you had a personal emergency, would you consider asking this person for help? If you ran into this person in the grocery store, would you be able to talk to her for ten minutes without mentioning work? If the person received the promotion you were banking on, would you be genuinely happy for her? "You can spare yourself disappointment later on by noting the differences between a work friend and a real friend," she says. "In the workplace, it's probably best to focus on work." Matt Villano is a freelance writer and editor based in Healdsburg, Calif. He is thankful that the only creature with which he must interact on a daily basis is his cat. Abrir artículo en el Sitio Web de Jugglezine. © 2007 Herman Miller, Inc. Terms of use Reproduction in whole or in part, or translation without written permission is prohibited. All rights reserved.

Bush, Obama y el TLC, según artículo en el NYT.

U.S. Politics.

Obama Asks Bush to Provide Help for Automakers By JACKIE CALMES Published: November 10, 2008

Doug Mills/The New York Times President-elect Barack Obama and President Bush talked policy in the Oval Office while their wives toured the residence.

WASHINGTON — The struggling auto industry was thrust into the middle of a political standoff between the White House and Democrats on Monday as President-elect Barack Obama urged President Bush in a meeting at the White House to support immediate emergency aid. Mr. Bush indicated at the meeting that he might support some aid and a broader economic stimulus package if Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats dropped their opposition to a free-trade agreement with Colombia, a measure for which Mr. Bush has long fought, people familiar with the discussion said. The Bush administration, which has presided over a major intervention in the financial industry, has balked at allowing the automakers to tap into the $700 billion bailout fund, despite warnings last week that General Motors might not survive the year. Mr. Obama and Congressional Democratic leaders say the bailout law authorizes the administration to extend assistance. Mr. Obama went into his post-election meeting with Mr. Bush on Monday primed to urge him to support emergency aid to the auto industry, advisers to Mr. Obama said. But Democrats also indicate that neither Mr. Obama nor Congressional leaders are inclined to concede the Colombia pact to Mr. Bush, and may decide to wait until Mr. Obama assumes power on Jan. 20. Separate from his differences with Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama has signaled to the automakers and the unions that his support for short-term aid now, and long-term assistance once he takes office, is contingent on their willingness to agree to transform their industry to make cleaner, more energy-efficient vehicles. A week after Mr. Obama's election, and more than two months before he takes office, the steadily weakening economy and the prospect of many more job losses are testing his effort to remain aloof from the nation's business on the argument that "we only have one president at a time." As the auto industry reels, rarely has an issue so quickly illustrated the differences from one White House occupant to the next. How Mr. Obama responds to the industry's dire straits will indicate how much government intervention in the private sector he is willing to tolerate. It will also offer hints of how he will approach his job under pressure, testing the limits of his conciliation toward the opposition party and his willingness to stand up to the interest groups in his own. G.M.'sshares tumbled on Monday to 1946 prices, closing down 23 percent to $3.36, as analysts downgraded the stock on worries it would soon run out of cash and shareholders would be wiped out by any federal bailout. Mr. Obama has been far more receptive than Mr. Bush to having the government intervene to rescue another major sector of the economy. He called automakers "the backbone of American manufacturing" in his first post-election press conference last Friday, and many thousands of their employees belong to unions that are part of the Democratic Party's base. But Mr. Obama's stance raises the question, with the country in a worsening economic situation, where would the Democrat draw the line as president? Mr. Bush has drawn his line at the automakers' doors, having already been forced to shelve the free-market principles of his Republican Party to bail out the financial industry over the past two months. But Republicans say he would acquiesce in aid to automakers in return for Congress's ratification of the Colombia pact and pending trade agreements with Panama and South Korea. The outgoing and incoming presidents met at the White House in private, without staff. The Democratic leaders in Congress, the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, have declined to call a lame-duck session for next week, as they had hoped, without assurance that Mr. Bush would support a stimulus package. Mr. Obama has called on the Bush administration to accelerate $25 billion in federal loans provided by a recent law specifically to help automakers retool. Late in his campaign, Mr. Obama proposed doubling that to $50 billion. But industry supporters say the automakers, squeezed both by the unavailability of credit and depressed sales, need unrestricted cash now, simply to meet payroll and other expenses.

On Friday, Mr. Obama said he would instruct his economic team, once he chooses it, to devise a long-range plan for helping the auto industry recover in a way that is part of an energy and environmental policy to reduce reliance on foreign oil and address climate change. While Mr. Obama campaigned on a promise of bipartisan conciliation, his choice for his White House chief of staff, Representative Rahm Emanuel, indicated on Sunday that no such deal linking auto-industry aid and a stimulus package with trade pacts was in the cards. "You don't link those essential needs to some other trade deal," Mr. Emanuel said on ABC's "This Week." Democrats close to both Mr. Obama's transition team and to Congressional leaders seemed willing to call Mr. Bush's bluff, calculating that he would not want to gamble that G.M. — an iconic, century-old American corporation with business tentacles in every state — would fail on his watch and add to the negative notes of his legacy. Also, economists as conservative as Martin Feldstein, an adviser to a long line of Republican presidents and candidates, have called more broadly for stimulus spending of up to $300 billion. The major automakers — G.M., Ford and Chrysler — are each using up their cash at unsustainable rates. The Center for Automotive Research, which is based in Michigan and supported by the industry, released on Election Day an economic analysis of the impact of one or all of them failing. If the Big Three were to collapse, it said, that would cost at least three million jobs, counting autoworkers, suppliers and other businesses dependent on the companies, down to the hot-dog vendors and bartenders next door to their plants. The center also concluded that the cost to local, state and federal governments would reach to as much as $156.4 billion over three years in lost taxes and higher outlays for things like unemployment and health care assistance. Separately, some economists say the demise of even one of the automakers could tip the current recession toward a depression. For Mr. Bush, however, the hard-line approach is his only leverage to make the trade agreements part of his legacy. The Colombia deal, especially, is strongly opposed by organized labor groups, which are a major force in the Democratic Party, and by human-rights activists. In the Senate and during his nomination race against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, Mr. Obama opposed the pacts and especially the Colombia agreement, given that country's reported human rights abuses against unionists. He insists he favors free trade, but only if trading partners agree to protections for their workers and the environment — reflecting the standard Democratic Party line since President Bill Clinton's administration. On his campaign Web site, Mr. Obama said he would oppose the Colombia pact "if President Bush insists on sending it to Congress because the violence against unions in Colombia would make a mockery of the very labor protections that we have insisted be included in these kinds of agreements." Organized labor is not the only interest group with influence in the Democratic Party that is weighing in as Mr. Obama plans his transition. Environmentalists are adamant that any aid be conditioned on the auto industry's dropping of its opposition to higher fuel-efficiency standards and investing more in new technology. That puts them at odds with unions, who oppose any strings, leaving it to Mr. Obama to mediate. Both as a candidate and now as president-elect, Mr. Obama has been in contact with former Vice President Al Gore, who last year won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on climate change. In a column published in Sunday's New York Times, Mr. Gore wrote that "we should help America's automobile industry (not only the Big Three but the innovative new start-up companies as well) to convert quickly to plug-in hybrids that can run on the renewable electricity that will be available." Mr. Obama has said that he wants to meet with the Big Three auto executives, but advisers say no meeting is scheduled. Among his advisers who have communicated with the industry chiefs and their representatives are Jason Furman, the Obama campaign's economic policy director; John D. Podesta, the head of Mr. Obama's transition; and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers, an Obama adviser who is under consideration to be Treasury secretary again.

MULTIMEDIA Slide Show. Blog The Caucus The latest on the 2008 election results and on the presidential transition. Join the discussion. Election Results More Politics News

Related For Obamas, a Tour of the White House and the Issues Ahead (November 11, 2008)

Abrir articulo en el Sitio Web del NYT

Copyright by the New York Times 2008

La Generación 0 , factor primordial en la elección de B. Obama.

Fashion & Style.

Generation O Gets Its Hopes Up By DAMIEN CAVE Published: November 7, 2008

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times; Sally Ryan for The New York Times (bottom row, far right) GENERATION RISING Young voters at the polls on Election Day in the New York metropolitan area.

GENERATION O is that college kid at the White House gate early Wednesday morning, lifting his shirt to reveal "Obama" painted in red on his chest. Or that stylized Obama T-shirt that makes irony look old, the "Obama Girl" on YouTube, or the thousands of notes on Barack Obama's Facebook page: "U are the best!!!" "yeah, buddy." And, of course, Generation O is the president-elect himself. Only a Fugees-loving, pick-up-basketball-playing, biracial president-elect would send supporters an e-mail message on election night that said: "I'm about to head to Grant Park to talk to everyone gathered there, but I wanted to write to you first." He signed it simply "Barack." After all, they were close. He and his biggest fans, the generation of young adults who voted for him in record numbers, together had slogged through 21 months of campaigning. And in his moment of victory, Barack Obama shared the glow of success. "All of this happened because of you," the e-mail message said. "We just made history." With that simple "we" in millions of in-boxes, the post-baby-boomer era seems to have begun. The endless "us versus them" battles of the '60s, over Vietnam, abortion, race and gender, at least for a moment last week, seemed as out-of-touch as a rotary phone. Of course, that was Mr. Obama's goal. In his book, "The Audacity of Hope," he was explicit in his desire to move beyond "the psychodrama of the Baby Boom generation — a tale rooted in old grudges and revenge plots hatched on a handful of college campuses long ago." Mr. Obama's victory was greatly helped by his young allies. More 18- to 29-year-olds went to the polls this year than in any election since 1972 — between 21.6 million and 23.9 million, up from about 19.4 million in 2004, according to preliminary estimates from the Center for Information and Research of Civic Learning and Engagement. And 66 percent voted for Mr. Obama, according to exit polls by Edison/Mitofsky. These young voters and those slightly older, who together may forever be known as Generation O, were the ground troops of the campaign. They opened hundreds of Obama offices in remote areas, registered voters and persuaded older relatives to take a chance on the man with the middle name Hussein. They saw in Mr. Obama, 47, who was born at the tail end of the baby boom era, the values that sociologists and cultural critics ascribe to them. Government under Mr. Obama, they believe, would value personal disclosure and transparency in the mode of social-networking sites. Teamwork would be in fashion, along with a strict meritocracy. The pinnacle and promise of that approach can be seen in Tuesday's stunning victory. But as January's presidential realities inevitably chip away at November's idealism, a few valleys may be around the corner. With two wars and a financial crisis to face, this generation may soon discover the limits of their consensus-oriented focus and unyielding faith in networks and communication. In many ways 2008 looks a lot like 1960, said Robert Dallek, the presidential historian. In both cases, a young Democrat won on a promise of youthful change. Voters, Mr. Dallek said, "want something fresh." President Kennedyresponded not just with soaring rhetoric and new programs like the Peace Corps. He also transformed communication between the president and the people. At the White House, he projected an image of openness and transparency. He let photographers take pictures of the Kennedy children. He held televised news conferences for the first time.

Jason DeCrow/Associated Press AT WORK AND PLAY Obama supporters at a victory celebration in Union Square.

Theodore Sorensen, the Kennedy speechwriter, said the youthfulness of Camelot brought a new casualness and intimacy to Washington. He recalled a softball game with reporters in the early '60s, in which the younger staff members invited the Council of Economic Advisersto play. Three older economists showed up and tried to fit in. "They took off their jackets and ties," Mr. Sorensen said. "They didn't go home to change into blue jeans, but they were swinging bats." Mr. Obama has created his own jacketless atmosphere, but on a grander scale, with a steady stream of e-mail messages and Facebook postings. Obama supporters know, of course, that the text messages from "Barack" are the work of a campaign aide, but that doesn't mean that it's not effective. Ellen Steiner, 23, a graduate student at the University of Colorado, Denver, said the direct style "makes me feel like I really was part of something great." Reid Johnson, 31, a volunteer at the Obama office in Wilson, N.C., agreed. "You get the feeling that you're becoming friends with him in that casual way," he said. "I think everyone takes ownership of it because you feel like you know who he is." It would be hard to overestimate how much communication and an informal tone means to this generation. They have poured out their foibles and triumphs on blogs, MySpace, Facebook or Twitter. Older Americans see this as dangerous exhibitionism, but young adults believe the conversation leads to open-mindedness and consensus. "This generation has been knocked for putting all of their personal stuff on full display," said Mik Moore, 34, a founder of the Great Schlep, which used a Sarah Silverman online video to help young Jews win their grandparents' support for Senator Obama. "But there is an upside, too, which is a willingness to communicate with large numbers of people in your network about what's important to you." Ideology doesn't matter. Young evangelicals can be just as creative in their use of the Web as liberal bloggers. The point is that communication technology is the tool that makes all things possible, from hook-ups and pop songs to protests or the president of their choice, said Neil Howe, a sociologist who studies young adults. And the enthusiasm has a way of spreading. Wearing a pink Chanel suit and gold heels, Holly Hennessy, a wealthy older Republican woman in Palm Beach, Fla., came out of the polls on Tuesday with goose bumps after deciding at the last second to vote for Mr. Obama. Matthew Weiner, the creator of "Mad Men," the AMC television series set in the early '60s, predicted that there would be more to come. "A year from now you're going to see that 65 to 70 percent of the people are going to claim they voted for Obama even if they didn't," he said. "That's what happened with Kennedy. People will be swept up in it." And yet, such a sweeping success could also breed trouble. "The risk is they vote for the first time, and then there's this incredible long-shot win — 'Gee this is easy,' " said Kurt Andersen, a founder of Spy and former editor of New York Magazine. There is also "a risk of this generation conflating our iPhones with the substantive policy progress that the iPhones and laptops enable." Inevitably, he said, "growing up is all about disappointment and things not going well — so that is a natural next step." The pain of dashed hopes, if it comes, could be eased by this generation's news media diet, which has made them fantastically informed and skeptical. Or it could be worsened by the psychology of how they were raised and came of age.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images Young supporters at a campaign office in Columbus, Ohio.

Ronald Alsop, author of "The Trophy Kids Grow Up: How the Millennial Generation is Shaking Up the Workplace," said that because today's young people have been trained to trust teams and systems — they love checklists — they often struggle when things do not go according to plan. Compounding the problem, they have also been told by everyone from Mom to Barney the Dinosaur that they are destined for greatness. They have seen 25-year-olds become millionaires overnight with companies like Google, and after helping Mr. Obama win, the question is whether they will settle for anything less than a central role. "They are used to getting a lot of awards and coddling from their parents, coaches and teachers," Mr. Alsop said. "So if they're put in some menial position, in a political or corporate environment, they are not going to be happy." On Mr. Obama's Facebook page, there are already needy supporters like Viki, who wrote, "Please keep this dialogue going." "We are here for you," she added, "and I am anxious to see, now that you have won, if you will keep your momentum with the people or let us go." Mr. Johnson, the volunteer in North Carolina, said that the new president needs to refresh his Internet presence to keep young constituents passionate. "There's a lot of attention deficit with this generation," he said. "You have to keep people engaged and active because it's a highly technical society and there are lots of ways to distract our minds." As if on cue, President-elect Obama posted pictures of election night on flickr and introduced a new Web site, change.gov, on Thursday. "Share your story and your ideas," it says, "and be part of bringing positive lasting change to this country." The site is in many ways an extension of the Obama campaign: casual, cool, interactive. BUT if these are the traits of the young, might they alienate older Americans? Mr. Dallek said that for the new president to succeed, he must be seen as representative of not just the new, but also the traditional. "This is the challenge: How to sustain the energy of these young people and fulfill their expectations but not go so far to be seen by these older folks as overreaching." Many baby boomers are unlikely to be comfortable with this generation's technological boosterism and ease with blurred identities and mixed ethnicities. Peter Wolson, a psychoanalyst and former dean of the Los Angeles of Institute and Society for Psychoanalytic Studies, said the crucible of the 1960s helped give baby boomers a deep suspicion of "the other." Their world was bifurcated: pro-war versus antiwar; communist versus capitalist. "There is a fear of intimacy and merging because of the sense that you'll be taken over by the other," Mr. Wolson said. "The fear is: 'We'll get the wool pulled over our eyes. We'll get taken advantage of.' " Seeing a new crop of young people texting their way to the Oval Office may never soothe those fearful boomers. For others, the generational transition may bring relief as the country seems to move past old, entrenched conflicts. Chuck D., 48, the rapper and former lead of Public Enemy, said he has been amazed at the ease with which his 20-year-old daughter and her friends have interacted with politics this year. While he spent his youth shouting the message, "Fight the power," his daughter fell in love with a candidate, voted for the first time and got exactly what she wanted. He couldn't be more pleased. "She doesn't bring the burden of history with her," he said. "She's not pigeonholed. She's free to make a healthy decision for the future."

Abrir Noticia en página web del NYT.

Copyright by the New York Times 2008