Whenever I think about social networking sites, I cannot help but to think about reality television. Those who are against reality television argue that the genre only exposes the negativity of people. However, reality television has become a phenomenon as all the major networks now have a large line up of reality shows, ranging from people living onto an island for thirty nine days or people aspiring to become a hair stylist. The connection I draw between social networking and reality television is how they both reflect social tendencies. These social tendencies include how people desire to know what others are doing and how people desire to build connections with others, no matter how tenuous it may be.
As an avid reality television watcher, I have to admit that I enjoy the genre because I like seeing complete strangers stress out during unusual circumstances, such as twelve people being stuck in a house together for four months in hopes of winning half a million dollars. Although my life is not broadcasted on television, aspects of my life have been exposed via-Facebook. Social networking sites have become internet tabloids, but instead of focusing on celebrities, it could focus on anyone within your social network. I used to be an avid Facebook user, but when people begin to question why I have been tagged in a picture with a certain person, when someone questions why I wrote on someone else’s wall, I knew I had to reconsider how I wanted to present myself on the internet.
Facebook has shown that people are interested in each other’s business, even without celebrity status and its more convenient to discover how someone else is through a website than actually communicating with them. There have been several occasions where I have attended a party only for a random person to come up to me and say that he or she has looked me up on Facebook and begin the “which friends do we have in common game,” where he or she begins to list people we may both know and I nod or shake my head in response to each name. I would have conversations with acquaintances where they would know what I was doing a few nights ago because of a wall post or a tagged picture. During these situations, I could help but think I would never want to have a conversation with this person because he or she has taken the liberty of getting to know me without actually talking to me. Furthermore, whenever this situation occurred, I wonder why people would dedicate their time to look up relative strangers.
Sites such as Twitter, where people only post 160 characters of what they are doing periodically throughout the day, show how people are always interested in what others are doing, where they’re going, and who they spend their time with, no matter how mundane it may be. Perhaps people are really interested in how others spend their time, or perhaps it is a way to build a connection with others. While life has its obstacles and makes it so you cannot always see your friends, or even best friends and family, these social networking sites allow you to instantaneously know what others are doing.
Although these social networking sites have allowed people to know what their friends are doing throughout the day instantaneously, has it deteriorated relationships? For example, I had a friend who broke up with her boyfriend because she thought he was cheating on her by writing on another girl’s wall throughout the day instead of spending time with her. Instead of approaching him in person to confront the issue, she decided to break up with him via-text messaging. She felt informed on his life because she was able to check his Facebook status whenever she wanted. She did not assume that she perceived the text in the wrong way. She failed to acknowledge that Facebook has its social limitations. Tone could not be translated into text, such as sarcasm. Furthermore, she did not acknowledge that having a conversation person to person could have opened the lines of communication. Conversation through social networking sites should not replace human interaction.
Even though social networking sites have many positive aspects, having an instantaneous connection with someone can have a negative impact. Not only does a social network user have to be completely aware that others are reading the page, but someone may misinterpret the content on the page. Furthermore, social networking pages should not be used as a primary tool to communicate. Similar to reality television and tabloids, the content shown can only be taken with a grain of salt. What is seen on the screen is only one side of a person.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting take that reality tv reflects people's desires to connect with others & that sites like FB are our own mini-reality broadcasts. Excellent observation that the FB author loses authorship once posted--that readers coopt & begin interpreting/expanding on our stories/lives in was we hadn't expected. Why the need to constantly know/share what we're doing in our daily lives? Isn't 95% of it completely boring (commuting, eating, crapping)? Maybe that's it. Maybe we're trying to entertain ourselves during the 95% of our boring day, hoping to fill that time with pieces of everyone else's interesting 5%. Or maybe much of our boring 95% isn't so boring to others because it's new to us? Could social networking just be a desperate attempt to fight the boring routine of our individual lives? That we're not really interested in connecting with others but disconnecting from ourselves?
ReplyDeleteYou raise some very interesting points in your post. You mentioned that facebook is similar to an everyman tabloid. A site where people actually become their own paparazzi. With reality television and social networking sites who can (or cannot) really be considered a celebrity these days. Did this change in our social perception of celebrities happen because of sites like facebook or was facebook a response to shifting attitudes.
ReplyDeleteI never connected social networking sites with celebrity culture before but now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense. It’s interesting that you mention Twitter as well. I’m always frustrated by how short 160 characters really is. I always find that I’m never able to get my point across the way I want to. But perhaps it says something about our modern attention spans that tweeting is so popular.
I like how this post contains anecdotes from your real life. This makes your blog very personable and accessible. Almost everyone in our generation has had a similar experience to the one you’ve discussed. Heck, I’ve even gone up to people and hi before because I knew them from facebook. Granted I never perused their interests to the point that I knew who they’re favorite bands were but I have been “that girl”.
It’s interesting because in a social interaction with someone you’ve only “met” online they do take a sort of celebrity status. If I don’t know someone but they know that I adore “baseball” and “refreshingly witty conversations” doesn’t that make them a groupie. It’s like we’ve entered an age of technological peeping toms. However, we must focus on both the audience and the presenter. Are we so concerned with image that we only feel truly comfortable meeting people in two dimensions. I cannot imagine how these shifts in our social consciousness would not affect relationships. You raise some very good questions in your post and as always it was quite an interesting read.