MIT 2371
Greg Wycliffe
April 11th 2011
Jennifer Martin
Ever since the dawn of religion various methods of social media have been introduced that tends to construe a primordial framework within which to view and make sense of our world. In the increasingly digital age of today a significant amount of social interactions both for business and pleasure happen through a digital medium. Modern societies find themselves in a rapid transition from traditional intimate and spontaneous relations between persons in a physical space; to the new distant and standardized electronic social practices through a virtual reality. Social media has become so pervasive, aesthetically pleasing, and multi-functional allowing for specific and acute human expression of images, ideas, and feelings connecting people instantaneously across geographically and socially diverse places. These practices foster globalization along with the prevailing ideals associated with social media in developed countries such as immediacy and capitalism while neglecting the primal human practice of face to face interaction. These technologies and devices are convenient and rational when it comes to enhancing social life but our blind faith in these technologies and the ideologies we agree with by using them standardizes our thinking and can have a negative effect on our creativity, imagination, and personal growth.
The existence and use of social media especially the web 2.0 has lead to an accelerated production of all types of information. This flow that appears as a perfectly natural occurrence to the public maybe becoming progressively turbulent to peoples’ ideas of themselves and their world. Todd Gitlin in his article Supersaturation, or The Media Torrent and Disposable Feeling, explains this as a massive torrent of media constancy including everything from text messages to TV shows that becomes a “central experience to life” (142) rather than outside media accompanying life. Ray Williams describes this phenomena as fragments of media images, ideas, and sonic activity which makes rhythms of drama upon drama that are built into everyday life.
Although the media stream is modern, it draws on ancient springs. To feel accompanied by others not physically present is hardly unprecedented. We have a profound capacity to harbor images of actual or imaginary other who are not materially at hand – to remember or speculate about what they looked like, wonder what they are doing, imagine what they might think, anticipate what they might do, take part in unspoken dialogues with them. (Gitlin, 144)
As you can see this phenomena is by no means anything new, but our new instant technologies of today gives people the opportunity to become idolized household names over night similar to the gods and heroes of ancient times. For example Justin Beiber’s few semi-popular youtube videos garnered the attention from Usher’s record label fast tracking him to a North American audience in a short period of time, (Entertainment Tonight). In essence Twitter is home to the new voices of the gods we idolize: celebrities. These manifestations of drama in our, now constantly, mediated world has evolved along with the progression of social media and has engrained a hunger for drama within us. “The culture of unlimited media takes up a place in our imagination. Its language and gestures become ours,” (Gitlin, 145). Like all media, social media exaggerates and sensationalizes its content both through the medium itself and by drawing upon the social and societal imagination that has been established and that is constantly evolving. This is beneficial in making our lives more dramatic and may give the impression of giving our life more meaning, however the blind acceptance of these normative social practices and belief in them having significance to our lives may be damaging to our own personal growth and traditional social being.
A major concern to be considered with social media is the way in which it can reformulate social life in certain geographic areas. Mobile devices and text messaging was introduced to the Philippines in 1995 and by 2001 more than 70 million text messages were being sent between Filipinos every day (Rheingold, 232). Their whole hearted embrace of the technology quickly became a part of their culture with someone texting at a funeral being considered nothing out of the ordinary. The fascination with sending jokes, rumors, and chain letters served as a political force for the Filipino public in January 2001when President Joseph Estrada lost his state power because of the smart mob organized through social media devices. Their textual culture prevalently linked to political opinions mobilized over a million citizens to participate in peaceful demonstrations in January to over throw President Estrada. Virtual interactions affecting real politics essentially gives citizens their own technological means to participate in democracy. The Filipino masses avidly using these devices amplified the universal drive to appropriate politics to the way the majority of the community saw fit. Within this community its own imagination is formed based on the previous societal imagination but augmented by the interests and motives shared universally by the community as a whole. All the texts, jokes, and rumors sent within this unified community essentially turns them into a medium of their own generating expectations and a circulation of messages which in turn gives everyone a means for gathering and transforming elements, objects, people and things. In this instance social media is being used by the nation at large not only for quick convenient social interactions but also to shape a community based around the merits of political participation. These uses of social media in the Philippines constitutes the use and role of these devices in society along with the primary avenues in which to understand their world. Although text messaging revamped social life in the Philippines it also accelerated participation in democracy reflecting the main interests and motives of the users of these technologies: being political.
Social media used during Egypt’s political reform these past 4 months has served as a powerful agency for human organization of thoughts and actions. Eric Goldwin in The Limits of Cyber-Revolution praises the internet for being “great at facilitating bonds among compatriots who wouldn't otherwise feel comfortable communicating openly and assembling a critical mass,” (Goldwin). One of the major benefits of social media however falls short when considering the reality of politics and how to participate in it as citizen striving for change. “It takes physical space to connect revolutionary passions with daily life and, more important, the broader population,” (Goldwin). Strong political progress depends on the importance and magnitude of being present in a physical space to speak to the masses, hopefully make news, and essentially gain much more attention than just the private participation in the virtual world. These dispersed individuals tweeting and facebook-ing about political reform in Egypt although they make up a online community of sorts has no power unless mobilized in a physical space. In this case social media is only used as a forum to circulate discussion, news, and opinions and has not been embraced by its users as a mode of democratization.
Blogs, videos, and images all posted from digital devices can efficiently portray a thought, belief, or event online. In Surowiecki’s TED talk in February 2005, he gives examples of such postings that give a vivid and in depth look at the reality of the Tsunami disaster. Most fascinating about these joe-schmoes personal accounts and camera phone recordings augmented by American media as news, is the voluntary cooperation to post these accounts. He extrapolates this idea to the entire internet praising the communities and individuals who essentially do work to organize information on the internet for absolutely free. The danger of becoming more tightly and tightly linked is that it is harder to be independent in thinking and shaping your own views. “Groups are only smart when the people in them are as independent as possible,” (Surowiecki). Therefore, the internet has the potential to be a reliable and infinitely original tool for information retrieval, but the appealing, easy to use technology that comes along with it could turn us into docile drones unless we think and act independently.
The capabilities of social media accelerating information flows and learning are undisputable. Todd Oppenheimer in his article The Computer Delusion explains the possible pros and cons of using computers as teachers in the classroom. When confined to a computer screen and a couple of input devices computer use is quite a one dimensional experience. We need to learn the conventions and rules of both the machine and the machines software; and after programming our minds to be in sync with the machine, we can finally learn what we are meant to learn or do with it. One study found after prolonged exposure to an elementary reading computer program, students “were no longer able to answer open-ended questions and showed a markedly diminished ability to brainstorm with fluency and originality.” This one example shows how by immersing ourselves in computers and applying rules and conventions to the ways we think and invent can alter the way our brain functions on its own thus stagnating creativity and personal growth. In respect to social media we learn the basics of how to use the program quite easily but continue to add and innovate to them in more deeply entrenched ways. We incorporate the functions and laws of the social media into our own thinking further solidifying the legitimacy of these devices and further digitizing our social imagination. Also in Oppenheimer’s article he mentions Alan Lesgold claims that any computer is an amplifier of what interests and motives the user has either towards “enlightened study practices or thoughtless ones.” For the reading program example above the program in question could have been designed by an amateur software designer and was thus not effective, forcing the students to comply and essentially figure out the program themselves, amplifying their confusion of the program and the lesson. In respect to social media it amplifies the very people participating in these social interactions (as potential F-List celebrities), their ideas (as the latest news report), interests (as ‘the next big thing’), and motives, along with the importance of the very social practices and devices in use. Ie. the Filipino’s who desired political reform in the 3rd paragraph.
The television show Gossip Girl follows a blogger (narrator) who follows and reports on the lives of the New York Elite (sons and daughters of the CEOs of large corporations). In this show social interactions are amplified and made more dramatic reducing the show and their existence in the shows universe to the social interactions they have and its significance to their lives. This show sensationalizes social life to the extent that it implies there is no life beyond the social life. The show refuses to bring up concepts such as democracy, equality, diversity, self actualization giving way to the full force of fashion, popularity and sex. This show reflects the dangers of embracing social media and its conventions, norms, and devices. Simply put: we lose sight of what is really important in our lives, rather we our pervaded to believe that other things, such as the world of celebrities, take precedence in giving meaning to our life. Social media does this: while connecting us constantly and instantly it isolates us from actual face to face physical interactions with others.
The incorporation of technology into learning is viewed as dangerous to some especially with a population of children. Jane Healy from Oppenheimer’s article explains: “Visual stimulation is probably not the main access route to nonverbal reasoning. Body movements the ability to touch feel manipulate and build sensory awareness of relationships in the physical world are its main foundations,” (Oppenheimer, 184). This is especially important for children who are the most impressionable. Hands-on experience is believed to imprint knowledge into our minds more effectively. Oppenheimer says its essential for children to have a broad base for learning including intellectually and emotionally before being introduced to a computer because “the human and physical world holds greater learning potential,” (Oppenheimer, 185). Being intellectually and technically inclined is not always a positive in the working world compared to someone who works emotionally and creatively according to Hewlett-Packard spokes-woman who says that they desire instead of, “predominantly computer experts, those who have talent for teamwork and are flexible and innovative.” Therefore the constant learning and engraining of social media as an effective substitute for physical interaction could have, or is having, a profound change on the way we structure and make sense out of our social world both virtually and in general. In fact if these social media practices are introduced early and consistently enough to young children they may already have a deeply engrained sensory awareness of touching buttons corresponding to a flickering screen. This may sound harmless but it silently gives consent to these technologies being ample substitutes for genuine social interaction, while promoting the use of these devices and the ideals that go with it (capitalism).
So what is being lost when social interaction is mediated through digital devices? With innovate new methods such as Skype and FaceTime from Apple it is hard to argue that there is a difference, however consider this: you are not inhabiting the same physical spaces, you are less in-tune with the other persons subtle body-language reflecting their true thoughts and emotions, the slight delay from technological imperfection can make the feeling of rapport hard to grasp when the two of you literally are not experiencing the same moment. These two methods DO however again further exaggerate and amplify the social interaction with a video accompaniment. These two recent developments in social media however do not lose nearly as much as the more simplistic methods of texting, and chatting online. “We chat without speaking, smile without grinning, hug without touching,” (Stoll, 189) From Clifford Stoll’s article, Further Explorations into the Culture of Computing he believes this reflects the ways in which we have learned and incorporated the non-obvious rules and conventions of social media devices while essentially unlearning social conventions in a physical face to face scenario. This prevailing practice of conforming to the computers rules, norms, and problem solving strategies “limit(s) our ability to recognize other solutions,” (Stoll, 190). Like standardizing our thinking as I said before, the more we use social media devices to point click and type to have a social experience the less creative and innovative we are in assuming new social roles and ways to interact both digitally but more so physically.
Take me for example. Over the past 2 months my friends have been telling me about multiple alternative texting platforms for smart-phones. I’ve downloaded for free both KIK messenger and Live Profile. Both essentially serve the same purpose with the same basic conventions. They both have profile pictures you can add, they both inform you when your message has been read by the recipient, and they both are a simple way to quickly text message your good ‘friends’ for free. Live Profile however gives you the ability to have a profile page similar to facebook to put your birthday, location, and PIN number to quickly share contacts with others. At first I saw this as an opportunity to become more connected with my peers and meet new people more easily. Obviously the reality is far from this. The truth is all this time I have spent setting these applications up, learning how it works, and wondering how my profile will look to other people I could have been doing things much more productive for my actual social life. Since realistically all I have done with these devices is rationalize my thinking about how to see social relationships as another back and forth instant message conversation or another PIN number to add to the ‘friend’ list. My point is these new social media programs ended up standardizing my thoughts and actions towards social interactions while distracting me from what I truly believe is really important which is making genuine connections with people in an personal and physically intimate setting. I still use Live Profile to text my friends who do not have a free texting plan. Worth noting is the feature introduced originally by BlackBerry messenger, is the “received” notification when you see someone has read your message. The very idea of this reflects the ideals of sustaining social media as a legitimate grounds for a real relationship. The social idea that it is rude not to respond to someone who says something addressed to you (even though they did not say it they just typed it).
Throughout this paper I have been addressing specifically social media, being software and devices that are used to maintain a social relationship with someone who has already something in common with you whether it be knowing of them, agreeing with them, or sharing motives. I have neglected the thousands upon thousands of online communities who are dispersed geographically but maintain close relations through mutual interests usually pertaining to a common website(s) or hobbies. Communities like these can foster the learning and teaching of technical abilities, beliefs, practices etc. very efficiently. These are very beneficial to the individuals involved who learn what they are seeking to learn: it’s convenient in that they do not need to leave their house and confront a stranger in person asking if they can help them. For example I used to frequent the Newgrounds.com Flash forums back in 2004 when I was still learning the ins and out of Adobe (Macromedia at the time) Flash. I would recognize users and their personality/posting style but more than anything I remember how helpful they were and the advice they had to offer. The primary motive of these community users (for me anyway) is to stimulate their rational mind. But that’s not to say people on these communities can develop strong emotional relationships through a digital medium, but I believe it is only a suggestion of a genuine relationship unless you are at least Skyping with them. Furthermore, I believe a long term, non-physical relationship with someone between someone and an able bodied, mentally sound, human being is not at all beneficial for them physically, emotionally, or mentally.
Social media provides an effective substitute for individual humanistic expression by thriving on drama and information idealized in the social imagination of those who partake, however it also standardizes the way in which we interact with one another influencing how our thoughts and perceptions are structured and rationalized potentially stagnating personal creativity, originality, and growth reducing our social existence and imagination to that provided by the prevailing social order. By prevailing social order I mean the designers and distributors of the social media and their (capitalist) ideals (consumerism, immediacy, sensationalism). Living a social life in the real world should not require too much brain power to interact with others and should be an organic experience. Mediated social experiences are always going to be repressive physically, emotionally, and mentally by the limited capabilities of the technology available and the limited choices the user has at their disposal. Communities can thrive socially online especially for stimulating rational thoughts pertaining to interests and goals. However the blind faith and embrace we have today with many of these social devices and technologies can significantly distract us and stagnate our personal growth. To close I will quote the outgoing, happy-go-lucky, sharp witted character of Ferris Bueller: “Life moves pretty fast, if you don’t stop and look around every once and a while you could miss it.”… Now we’re used to staring at screens for hours on end. Go figure.
Works Cited
Entertainment Tonight. Pop Music’s Top 6 YouTube Success Stories. Entertainment Tonight
Online.<http://www.etonline.com/music/105415_Pop_Music_s_Top_6_YouTube_Success_Stories/index.html> Accessed: April 10th 2011
Gitlin, Todd. Supersaturation, or The Media Torrent and Disposable Feeling. Living in the
Information Age. Pg. 139-45. Wadsworth. Belmont, CA. 2005.
Goldwin, Eric. The Limits of Cyber-Revolutions; Public spaces, not virtual town squares, are
still the places where uprisings are decided. New York Media LLC. <http://proquest.umi.com.proxy2.lib.uwo.ca:2048/pqdlink?did=2310980251&Fmt=7&clientId=11263&RQT=309&VName=PQD> Accessed: April 9th 2011
Oppenheimer, Todd. The Computer Delusion. Living in the Information Age. Pg. 181-7.
Wadsworth. Belmont, CA. 2005.
Rheingold, Howard. Smart Mobs: The Power of the Mobile Many. Living in the
Information Age. Pg. 231-8. Wadsworth. Belmont, CA. 2005.
Stoll, Clifford. Further Explorations into the Culture of Computing. Living in the
Information Age. Pg. 188-92. Wadsworth. Belmont, CA. 2005.
Surowiecki, James. When social media became news. TED Talks. Filmed: Feb 2005. Accessed
April10th<http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/james_surowiecki_on_the_turning_point_for_social_media.html>