Posted: Friday, April 1, 2011 1:30:45 AM
MEDIA: The Evils of Social Networking
Twitter. Facebook. The now-out-of-style Myspace. These are the obvious choices when we consider the impact of modern media in our daily lives and the lives of those around us. Consider them we shall, but from the relatively unique perspective of an individual who doesn’t have a Twitter account, a Myspace page, and only has 12 friends on Facebook. The irony is that despite the apparent lack of social networking, all of the instances of this new wave of media outlets still serve to create the single largest media influence in my life.
Every day, we are bombarded with media. Everywhere we look, there is an advertisement, a flash of a news gem, or a pamphlet warning us against the dangers of prescription drugs. In advertisements alone, it is a much-touted and -lamented estimate that we view upwards of 5,000 separate instances a day (Johnson, 2006). Despite the deluge of information spewed from these sources, none really factor into most of our lives. They exist, barely on the periphery, hanging out and waiting patiently or screaming ineffectively for our attention. With the exception of noteworthy news sources, rarely do we seek information from any of these poor, attention-deprived children of modern society.
The true star of the show is social networking. Social networking’s presence in modern life is nearly ubiquitous at this point, and its presence is downright insidious. It sneaks up everywhere: at restaurants (“Like us on Facebook!”), in schools whose class discussions are perpetrated via Twitter comments, even in relationships--changing your Facebook relationship status is the new breaking up with an answering machine. Standing in line at the grocery store, every third person is looking at their phone—possibly letting their friends or followers know what a successful shopping trip they just had.
This development is a blight on mankind. It removes the humanity of interpersonal communication. Everything in an individual’s life is distilled down to a few misspelled words or at best a malformed sentence and is posted for their 300 friends to see. Of those 300 friends, fifty may read the post. Twenty-five of those fifty may respond to the post; the rest spend a few seconds getting a brief chuckle from the horrible grammar or the nugatory substance of the post. This creates a level of exposure to a meaningless stream of information that has never been seen before.
Not only is this deluge of information pointless, but it is harmful. It encourages bad English and plastering deficient ideas on walls like digital graffiti. It’s arguable that there are no benefits to this form of communication. While the social aspect of social networking is undeniably useful—catching up with friends you haven’t spoken to in years is a pleasant experience that would be difficult to find otherwise—the ability to tell the world the intimate details of the least interesting parts of life is not.
Reference:
Johnson, C. (2006). Cutting through advertising clutter. Retrieved March 5, 2011, from
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/17/sunday/main2015684.shtml