In our age of technology, crazy new things are constantly being conceived and invented. As with majority of new technologies throughout history, such as the washing machine and the internet, people tend to freak out and fear the worst from these inventions. Many believe they create whole new worlds we live in or simply destroy us. This concept is called hysteria. It refers to the idea that many people believe new technology will rot away humanity. People believed the internet would end face to face conversation, but obviously this did not happen. In our world today a new society-changing technology is slowly becoming a reality: the self-driving car. Following the hysteria model, many people are freaking out over it. They believe it will end driving for ever and endanger humanity. An example of a man in hysteria over these new cars is a blogger (not entirely sure of his name) on directorblue.blogspot.com. His post on self-driving cars is an interesting fear he has with the further development of the futuristic vehicles.
The post the blogger wrote was out of fear that the self driving cars would severely increase the governments surveillance of us and allow them to control our every move. He claims that the government will take whatever chance they have to hop on the idea of self-driving cars so they can control our traffic and control what places we do and do not go to. He also claims that they will be mandated and therefore the government will be able to track every single citizen within the country who drives. He makes the reference to another new technology, drones, as an example of them taking opportunities to watch us. The post as a whole spells fear and hysteria that self-driving cars and all their technology will lead to the government controlling our lives.
Obviously this idea is a little crazy. This man is clearly deeply afraid of the government watching his every move and fearful of what they could do to us. Self-driving cars may bring driving to a whole new level of safety, ease, and efficiency but the blog poster skips these positives and focus on the worst case scenario for what the cars could be. This post displays hysteria very well showing how some people come up with wild fears of what high tech stuff might do to us. These self-driving cars are not out yet so who knows, they may turn us into robots of the government. This is highly unlikely though and people will realize this once they are around for some years. Until then, however, people like this blog poster will be losing their minds about the end of humanity.
The question, "Who am I?" is a question that causes people of all ages to stop and ask themselves at some point in their lives. Similarly, "What does it mean to be me?" is another thoughtful, introspective question that often causes much distress in someone who is pushed to answer. The difficulty often comes from people struggling to find the words that can describe themselves the best. For example, there are many ways to describe someone who is funny. Is he hilarious or is he more sarcastic? Depending on the slight change of a word, one can think of someone entirely different. Therefore, overall, being able to establish a firm identity is very challenging task for most, especially since there are two types of identity: personal identity and social identity.
Personal identity regards what one thinks about themselves and what stories one decides to tell other people about themselves. This identity is the identity that one prefers to be viewed at by people. Social identity, however, is based on what others think of oneself and the stories they tell regarding oneself. The article, "How Nostalgia Went From Being A Mental Illness To An Internet Phenomenon," was written to explain how nostalgia helps create social identity.The author, Heba Hasan, does a great job explaining just how nostalgic apps can be. Timehop, for instance, is an app that is strictly about looking into past tweets, facebook posts, instagram posts, and more. The app has gained million of downloaders within a year who simply just love the idea of looking back at their lives and reliving the moments they once though were important enough to tweet or post about.
According to Mun-Young Chung (who is currently working on his dissertation on media and nostalgia at Penn State University), "After sharing media content on a social network you have a feeling that you are a part of a certain generation and you're more likely to want to connect with other people who share the same nostalgia as you" (Hasan). Why else do people post pictures on Facebook and Instagram other than to let the world what they are doing? Interestingly enough, I never really thought about what social networks really entail until I read this article, which put it in perspective. All social networking sites are just outlets for individuals to establish a social identity. People are in control of what people see about them, which is why most people try to post as many photos of themselves at vacations and parties and social events since it enhances their lives on their internet profile.
Considering our generation is the generation that has established the idea of "facebook stalking," it is not uncommon to think that people set their profiles up a certain way so that they can be the most appealing. By only posting certain photos. tweets, statuses, etc., one is establishing a social identity for themselves. For instance, someone can seem like a very sociable person who is very much into the "party scene," because of all the red cup, large crowd snapchats they post everyday. Yet, the same person would never put up a picture of themselves just sitting eating a tub of ice cream and watching ten seasons of a show on Netflix on a Friday night. Therefore, profiles online are very subjective and work towards manipulating social identities. More importantly, people like reminiscing on things like old prom photos or tweets about how much you loved NSYNC because it is an indication of how their social identity was at some point in time. The online world has become a permanently view-able resume of one's social identity.
In the past few lectures we have been discussing topics such as online dating and online identities. With those topics in mind Professor Walker had mentioned that studies have found that majority of people involved in the studies would much rather prefer to confide in a complete stranger on the internet than confide in someone they know. I found this alarmingly strange and I thought the complete opposite. Personally, I would think that people would be more likely to confide in people they already know because they might already know the situation and the compiling parts. Whereas, a complete stranger online doesn’t know anything (unless you tell them of course) and I would think that some people may feel by confiding in complete strangers that they are quick to be judged. On the other hand, Why Do We Confide in Complete Strangers is an article from the Los Angeles Times by Susan Jacques on the topic of confiding in strangers. Susan notes that many professionals/experts agree having, what they refer to as anonymous ears, has its perks by reducing tension and fear of the other’s reaction. This is beneficial for the confide by letting whatever it is that is causing them tension or stress off their chest. However, this article also mentions the other side of the fence where the anonymous people who were chosen to be the confinders are impacted by stories, and even can tend to stress them out even though it isn’t directly their problem.
Unfortunately some people see the vulnerability that comes from online confidees online and they do what we refer to as catfishing. Catfishing is when someone lies about their online identity. Whether it be an intimate relationship or just a friendship a lie is a lie. There's a show on MTV that specializes in finding these people and helping them meet their online confides or significant others. Most of the time when the producers get involved to help they find that the other person isn't who they said they were. Ending with someone feeling very sorry, someone very upset, and both severely confused. Some times the show ends with them eventually being friends, but most of the time not. The confidee has been seen to feel so hurt that in the end after finding out they have been lied to in some cases for years on end that they want nothing to do with the other person.
The concepts associated with contemporary identity definition that we discussed in lecture have challenged my preconception on the traditional sense of “identity”. According to the lecture, identity was once defined as “one true, fixed, and stable” image that everyone holds. Departing from the old paradigm, modern definition of identity purposed that one individual can actually have multiple identities that alter over time accordingly under different occasions by suggesting that identity is “flexible, multidimensional, and social constructed sense of self”. I personally feel connected with this idea because I always feel difficult to define my personality when I am asked to. For example, I can be both extroverted and introverted, depending on who I am staying with. When I hang out with my friends, my family, or whom ever I am familiar with, I tend to be very extroverted to the point that my friends often tell me to shut up. On the contrary, I behave like a introverted person when interacting with strangers. Thus, I refuse to simply describe myself as either “extroverted” or “introverted” for I selectively present the different aspects of my personality in accordance with social needs and environments.
As Internet rapidly gained its popularity since the beginning of 21st century among common households, an increasing number of people started to explore their online identity with social networking sites. Unlike selective interaction in reality, Internet is an unique communication medium which introduced the idea of identity disembodiment, which suggested that identity can be free of physical constraints. When Internet users realize that their figures no longer depend on their true self (which is the best-known aspect of their image in reality), some of them choose to pretend to be someone else or portray different aspects of themselves, which is known as identity play. The idea of identity play, as well as multiple identity, both illustrated the uncertain nature of our socially constructed identities especially with the prosperity of modern technology.
However, just like other old technologies, Internet is evolving and developing over time with technical improvement as well as government regulation. Aleks Krotoski purposed in his article "Online identity: is authenticity or anonymity more important?” that the days of “no one knows if you are a dog on internet” might come to an end. A substantial amount of Internet users have now started to support the authenticity of online identity by calling Internet anonymity into questions. Krotoski presented the debates of authenticity identity on Internet issue by presenting the arguments from both sides: advocates contended that anonymity makes people less responsible for their comments and leads to "lack of integrity” while opponents manifested that authenticity kills creativity and denied the chance to “start over”. In my opinion, people do tend to be more responsible for what they say on the Internet when their cannot disclose their real identity (e.g., on the real name based social networking sites such as Facebook) knowing that they might face consequences. When I argue with people on Internet, I am usually less aggressive on Facebook (real name) but more fierce on twitter (pseudonym). I do agree that banning anonymity can help to create a better atmosphere on Internet, yet the harms can outweigh its benefits. People have the need to portray different aspects of self even in reality, and identity play on Internet gives them the opportunity for doing that. If everyone on the Internet knows who you are in reality, your figure on internet, once again, must depend on your physical appearance and other characteristics, such as race, education, income, etc. Internet established an utopian like visual society where everyone is equal, and overly promoting authenticity will undermine the balance. Overall, Internet challenge the traditional view on identity and supports multiple identity by introducing online identity play with its anonymity, which I believe should not be destroyed.
The notion of online dating is highly controversial with very polarizing views about it. Although some people do find their one true love, this is not the case for everyone. Jesse Singal of The Science of Us wrote an article called "The Weaknesses of Online Dating," that really uncovers all of the flaws associated with this quickly growing trend. (http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/07/weaknesses-of-online-dating.html) She explains how a major review was done on the topic and it concluded that "[M]any aspects of online dating do not appear to improve romantic outcomes and might even undermine them." Many small reasons reasons for this were described, the first of which being that perusing through all of those profiles causes one to make very judgemental evaluations of complete strangers which has been shown to "cognitively overwhelm" users. This has been shown to ultimately undermine romantic outcomes. For dating apps like Tinder this is extremely valid. In Tinder, a user either swipes left or right based on a couple of pictures and a short bio that many people do not even have. Are we really basing our choice in who we think we could fall in love with on such a superficial trait?
Secondly, it is written that the CMC that is available through these online date sites really only increases attraction if it is only used for a short period of time. It can also be potentially fatal to the formation of a relationship if it leads to high expectations that are not met when first meeting face to face. I personally can see the truth in this because I love talking online. When I talk online there is no synchrony. This means that I have time to think of hilarious responses. It also makes me feel more confident because I don't have to actually see their reactions to what I say. Overall this leads to me being a much more outgoing and sociable person on the internet compared to in real life. This is why I could never do online dating because I have a feeling that a guy may be attracted to me when I chat online with him, and then I won't hear back from him ever again after our first most likely awkward date. Oh well.
The last flaw that's mentioned is that it is doubtful that there is actually any scientific matching algorithm that is based on data that has been collected before people have met that can effectively decided if they are compatible. So online dating is not a concrete and scientific process. Everyone has different tastes for the qualities he or she wants in a significant other, and it is way too complex for a computer to be able to guess who would be perfect for whom.
However there is one last point made that could either be a horrible flaw or an amazing strength, depending on your point of view. Casual sex has never been so easily obtained! It is stated that "Those who are on dating websites in search not of lasting commitment, but simply "a good time," tend to have better luck." Now this is great for young people who are not yet ready to settle down, but what about the others? In this amusing but kind of sad story, a 31 year old online dating user said “I was genuinely trying to meet people I’d click with and want to hang out with again. But I ended up having what would probably be considered a ‘high quantity of sex’ (at least according to my GP) as a side effect.”
In the end, I think it's safe to say that the idea of online dating is all up to personal preference and what you're looking for. While some people have had amazing luck with it, others had to endure dating disasters. In either case, it seems as though online dating is going to continue to grow exponentially.
When I was a young child going on
family vacations my dad would have to use a map or sometimes print out Google
directions so that we could get to our Cape Cod destination successfully.By the time I turned sixteen I did not have
to use a map or anything like that.Fortunately, GPS systems would built in to the car or available for an
affordable price.Once I got an iPhone
finding directions became even simpler just by downloading an app (Google
Maps).Now when I’m going somewhere all
I have to do is plug in an address from my current location.
In this post I will apply the GPS
technology with the concept of Hype vs.
Hysteria we discussed in lecture.Hype
is the belief that this technology will change the world in a positive
way.Hysteria is the belief that this
particular technology is going to have a negative impact on society and its
people.
When the
GPS technology was introduced to the consumer market many people had high hopes
and positive attitude toward it, but there was also people with negative
attitudes and had doubts about it.GPS
allows anyone to get accurate directions to any destination in the world.I use GPS almost every time I am driving to
somewhere I have never been before.It
is quick and easy to use because A) its on my phone and B) it directs me
through the speakers in my car.Also,
Google Maps will analyze the route I am taking and offer to change the route if
there is a quicker way to my destination.But there are people with doubts and hesitations about GPS and how it can
potentially have negative impacts.And
those people with those doubts aren’t wrong.The article I chose to read is “Hacking GPS and Satellite Navigation:
Potential Criminal Payoffs” by Future Crimes.The article explains that hackers can use jammers to interfere with your
GPS system on your phone or car, allowing them to control the route on your
GPS.Criminals could potentially locate
and track expensive cargos or trucks with desired items and change their route
or intercept these high valued cargos.The
scary part about this is that such “jamming devices” are widely available on
the Internet for affordable prices so everyone can potentially use these
devices for illegal purposes.
New
technology advances are improved and developed very quickly these days.And therefore society will only become more
and more dependable on technology such as GPS.People will have no idea when their GPS is hacked and is being
manipulated by a criminal behind a computer.I agree with the author that this is a potential and very likely concept
of crime in the future.We can see it
now developing with recent events such as the Sony hackers regarding the
controversial comedy “The Interview” and the hackers responsible for hacking
Xbox Live on Christmas, which resulted in the service being shutdown for gamers
trying to play their new games on Christmas.This is a concept of crime that needs a solution/counter so that people’s
safety and well being aren’t at risk.
People love to
show who they are in face to face communication. By wearing a hoodie that has a
big PSU logo on, dyeing hair in pink, or even having a permanent tattoo, people
communicate and continuously deliver who they are, or an identity. The identity is about who am I, but it is not only
personal aspect such as who do I think I am but also social concept that an
identity is built in a part of other people and shaped through feedbacks from
them. Moreover, unlike a traditional view on identity, which stated identity as
a single fixed stable idea, the contemporary view on identity says it is
flexible and multiple identities exist. Just like people love to share their
identities with symbolic markers in face-to-face communication, people who are
living in a social network era also share who they are constantly via their SNS
or other online sources.
Just like an
offline, people self-manage about their identity online, and sometimes it
becomes a play to perform. Identity play
is a one way to manage own identity. Using strategic endeavor people do
self-presentation online. From social media such as Facebook, Instagram, and
twitter to a user-generated media like blogs and Youtube, a profile takes a
huge part of the online identity. People care about a profile picture a lot
because online where the non-verbal communication- physical appearance- is
absent, profile picture takes a role of showing who they are visually. According
to Goffman’s idea of identity as a performance, people have creativity and
freedom in forming identity. There is a front region/stage where character
plays as what they are, but on the back region where no one but himself or
herself can see is the place that ‘real me’ lives. It is one of our natures to
hide bad and weak part and only display fancy side on the front. However, when
that play gets too deep into real me, sometimes we get confused and depressed
between the character online and reality offline.
According to an article from
Huffington
post, consider the fact that on social media sites, we consider our
profiles to be presentations of who we are. Therefore, through interaction with
the social medium, the real and ideal selves intersect; and the ideal self is
at least partially actualized. In essence, our online selves represent our
ideals and eliminate many of our other real components.
CMC often has disadvantages from lacking
non-verbal part of the communication, but that weakness can be useful when it
comes to the identity play. Anonymity gives people freedom to build a whole new
person in the cyberspace. No matter who they really are in the real life they
can create a new person online. Some people live a totally different life
online like they change their names, gender, or even appearance.
Once
I saw a TV show about a girl who doesn’t have friends in her real life. She
eats lunch by herself at the school, always alone and none of her classmates
know her, but online she has more than 5000 followers on her Facebook. Because
she does lots of Photoshop on her picture, she looks so different on her
Facebook. She would buy and wear a T-shirt that does not fit to her just to
take a one-photo shoot. Then she crops a picture and does lots of Photoshop
from her face to body. I could see that she was very happy living a two
different life because at least everyone loves her online. However I think
identity play went to far for her that she doesn’t take care about her real self
and abnormally obsessed with fake identity. For someone it is just another way
to communicate with others, but the Facebook with her fake identity was the
only method to her.
From
the author of previous
article gives some advice to people who are using social medias by saying, “Rather
than focusing your attention and effort into creating an ideal online persona,
use your time and effort to accomplish the goals that will align your real self
with your ideal self. By doing so, you will ultimately become more fulfilled as
you accomplish the goals that will lead to your path to self-actualization the
"real" you” As one of the users of social media like Facebook and
Instagram, I also pay attention to what goes to on my wall either video I share
or selfie I took with my friends because online, they represent who I am.
Therefore I only post a selfie that I look good, or even better than what I really
look like by using a fancy filter. Though I manage my online identity, I try to
maintain who I really am on the online too because I know that I will lose myself
and get depressed if I start to get confused between real me and cyber-me.
As we've all seen the movie "When Strangers Click: Five Stories From the Internet (2010)," 22% of heterosexual couples met online. This research was conducted in 2010 which is 5 years ago, the rate is much higher nowadays. Other studies have found that 50% had moved a relationship from online to face-to-face and 1/3 of new marriages started online. Although many negative views on online dating are still presence, online dating are becoming very normal and famous. And it is natural to have both positive and negative views on certain subject. Just like any other things that exist in the world, online dating has ups and downs.
Online dating has become part of our lives; not for the whole population but for quite decent amount of people. We could also measure the popularity of online dating just by looking at varieties of media covering online dating.
ABC News shows 4 best tips to find love online based on the scientific study.
Tip 1). Screen Name
Finding a screen name that starts with an earlier letter in the alphabet will help you be more noticeable when people search.
Tip 2). Profile Photo
There are many different ways how you can take your profile photos, but for online dating websites, there are three different pictures you should take and upload in order to attract others. First picture should contain yourself having genuine smile with your head slightly tilted. Also, the study revealed that wearing red colored clothes will help you to be more attractive. Second picture should contain your full body. Third picture
should have you and your friends together. The study found that one appear more desirable when people around you look like they are having fun. These pictures don't need to be in order but make sure you have all three pictures.
Tip 3). Profile Bio
Writing profile bio can be time-consuming and boring sometimes but it is crucial to write a concise and honest bio when seeking for partner online.
Tip 4). Don't just say "Hi"
When you found someone to approach, make sure you don't just say "hi." Start with a complement and question them. For instance, "You are hot, how are you?"
Communication as we know it has evolved over time. Before we were sending letters which took days to get to a person and days to get a reply. Then we moved on to Email which was quicker but the person still could take a while to respond. Then to instant messaging and now with the technology of today we can send a message in a matter of seconds and get a reply just as quick. Communications isn't the only thing that has changed over time though, so had dating. The first I remember ever hearing of online dating was Eharmony, at first I thought it was totally bizarre. I thought who would even use an online dating site, when you can date people you can talk to in person. Not there are thousands of sites for online dating. They have sites for all types of interest, if you are a farmer and want to start dating you can do it right in front of your computer with farmersonly.com.
Something about online dating is that you have to be very careful because we know that social media is basically about sharing your best self that you see fit to the world. So you have all power to create a persona for yourself. You can untag photos that may not fit the identity you are trying to present. You have the power to only post things that you want to post. Some people do this in small ways like untagging a picture or they may do it in a big way like even being a different person online. This is where anonymity comes into play because the people you come into contact with you may not know much about them, so they can tell you everything you want to hear and send you pictures that aren't even them without you having a clue. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/julie-spira/online-dating-vs-offline-_b_4037867.html In this article it list some pros and cons to online and offline dating. I agree completely with this article. It made me think that sometimes people do really lie about who they are, while I was reading this I thought about an episode of catfish where like an male was pretending to be a female online to talk to a guy. We know people who lie about who they are online as Catfish, and this has potential to become dangerous. Yeah this video is a humorous one but these kind of things really do happen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCXEd5sZpGA.
The advent of social media has given rise to many different phenomena. Many of them involve harmless uses, such as connecting with long separated friends or following organizations. However, not everything is always as it seems on these websites. Often times people can pretend to be someone that they are not for various reasons. This can result in very negative consequences. A specific example of this online trickery is catfishing. Catfishing is when someone pretends to be someone that they are not in order to solicit some form of romantic attention from another person. Although it seems easily preventable and just plain stupid, it is a real problem that could happen to many of us.
Catfishing was brought to attention in a 2012 movie "Catfish" MTV later created a series about it. However, it may not have taken off until it happened to a recognizable figure. In January 2013, reports surfaced that the girlfriend of Manti Te'o, one of the nation's best college football players, had not been dead as previously thought, but instead never existed. Then, television actor Thomas Gibson was catfished. NBA champion Chris Anderson was the next victim. The public all wondered how these people could be so dumb that they could not figure out that their girlfriends were fake. Even the popular TV show, "Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia" made fun of the victims of catfishing in one of its episodes. However, it is not always so simple.
Catfishing schemes can be incredibly elaborate and convincing. Many of us are on our social media sites 24/7- it is not out of the question that people meet a romantic partner on one of them. If this person that you meet sends you a ton of photographs, talks to you on the phone with a voice that seemingly matches the photos (here is Teo's fake girlfriend's voice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af5X_A5TspE) , as well as reassures you with various other forms of media, really anyone could be fooled. Sure you would have never met the person in real life, but with all the familiarity through the photos and other sent items, you may be able to feel very in touch with the person. In this day and age, we depend more and more on our social networks for maintaining our relationships. Thus, the possibility for someone to exploit this fact through lying is very real. It is not always obvious when you are being catfished.
The effects of catfishing can be highly damaging. There can be legal issues involved, such as the case with NBA player Chris Anderson. His lawyer described it as "Manti Teo's [situation] on steroids". http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/19/chris-birdman-andersen-catfish-hoax Chris was involved in charges of extortion and child pornography. Eventually, he was cleared, but only after having to go through the legal process. Not only do victims of catfishing waste their time on the fake person, they may also buy them gifts and waste their money. Catfishing can also be used to blackmail the victim. Finally, catfishing can damage the psyche of the victim. Many people are not incredibly secure in their identity. To have someone go online and pretend they love you, while in actuality they can have ulterior motives, can mess with the victims perception of themselves.
Catfishing is more common than people think. Despite the public's contrary thoughts, it could really happen to almost anyone. Sometimes, the perpetrators can be incredibly convincing. These schemes could also have very negative effects such as legal issues, blackmail, and damage to the victim's identity. When meeting someone online, you have to be really careful to make sure that they are a real person. It is kind of sad that this statement needs to be said, but the necessity is definitely real.
Almost everyone that is online knows about online dating and most likely knows a few people personally who have met their significant other from either social media or an online dating website. The possibilities are endless and quite honestly frightening. For example, Tinder is an application for smartphones in which you can literally swipe "yes" or "no" on a user's profile picture to determine if you like them. Personally, this seems shallow and odd to judge someone on one or two pictures when you know absolutely nothing about them, but I digress. Also, there are applications where you can type in a preference for what kind of person you find attractive and up will pop hundreds of people that fit the bill, almost like "ordering" a potential lover. In this blog I will discuss the pros and cons of online dating, as well as many other factors that are thrown into this "digital pot" that we call online romance.
In my personal opinion and experience, I find that online dating can be creepy as well as less meaningful than face-to-face meeting. This directly correlates to how we discussed in class that while CMC is sometimes more convenient and available, it can also cloak the non-verbal channels that are very important when it comes to building relationships. Not all social cues are available which can cause online relationships to be constricted in how deeply two people can get to know each other. However, online dating can become much more meaningful if you use it as a tool take the relationship from the computer to up close and personal. A recent study found that 1/3 of marriages in 2013 were formed online. This number is quite staggering considering that personal computers were almost non-exist twenty years ago. The most successful online relationships were taken from the online dating world to the real world. These relationships have the same amount of breadth, depth, and quality as relationships that started face-to-face.
Online dating is quite a hot topic these days because of the positives and the dangers. A positive is that you could find the person that you will spend the rest of your life with, however, a negative is that you could be "catfished" by a 45 year old man pretending to be a pretty girl. Online dating is a crapshoot and in this article, 4 Reasons to Ditch Online Dating and Seek Out Romance the Old-School Way, it discusses the pros and cons of online dating. One of the main points that I took from this article is that online dating doesn't answer the real questions about someone. Sure a person can look like your type in their profile, but in real life you could absolutely despise them. A profile doesn't show people's innermost qualities and how they communicate and act on a day-to-day basis. It just shows a few things about them and has a few pictures. Also, this article discussed how these dating sites that are supposed to be "quick and easy" can sometimes be time consuming and in many cases a waste of time. Think about all of the time that it takes for you to fill out a long questionnaire on match.com or another site, along with all the time that you put into making your profile look appealing and then compound that with the time that you waste searching through hundreds of possible candidates and sometimes not even finding any. You would have been better off going to a social event or a bar or something of that sort, rather that sitting at your computer looking at less than stellar candidates for your next love interest.
In conclusion, I wholeheartedly am opposed to online dating for many of the reasons that I have previously stated above. I believe that it is much more effective and meaningful to go out and do something and meet someone than to be at home alone on your computer searching for your next partner. While sometimes it can be effective to online date, more times than not it seems that people strike out.
There
are two opposing theories in computer meditated communication (CMC) research
explaining the relationship between social transformation and technology.One of these theories is technological determinism which posits social transformation is
caused by technology.According to this
view, technology effects social change at three levels, individual, social
interaction, and institutional.While
the opposing view, social constructivism
theorizes that people cause change not technology.Furthermore, it includes the idea that technology
is dependent on our uses, the context, and application to bring about social
change.While most CMC scholars stand on
one side, personally, I believe both these theories are in effect when it comes
to technology and social transformation.
Activism
is a great example of both technological determinism and social constructivism
at work.Most, non-profit organizations
and other groups currently use technology and social media to promote their
cause.In the past, these groups had to
work very hard to get their messages out to the public and change took a lot
longer.During the civil rights
movement, for example, activist engaged in non-violent protest, boycotts, and
sit-ins to fight for equal rights.Now
with more advanced technology, the internet, and social media activist can
spread their messages to larger audiences all over the world in relatively
little time.
The article, HowSocial Media has Changed Activism – A look at the benefits of online collectiveactivism, takes a technological determinist view and describes how technology
has changed the way non-profit organizations market.The article discusses how before the internet
it was much harder for non-profit organizations to advertise on small funds and
tight budgets.Often there was controversy
over using funds to advertise when all the money should have been going towards
the cause.These organizations had to
put in a lot of hours and depended on word of mouth, fliers, and the media that
was available at the time, such as radio, television, and newspapers.However, now raising awareness for a cause is
as easy as a click of the mouse.Most
organizations have their own websites with information on what their purpose
is, why it is important, how to get involved, and how to donate.Internet users can now share these sites on
social networking sites, such as Facebook and twitter.Non-profits can also use content sharing
sites, like YouTube, to raise awareness.
Two big examples
of activism through technology and social media that come immediately to mind
are Kony 2012 and the ALS ice bucket challenge.During my freshmen year, the Kony 2012 video produced by Invisible Children,Inc. went viral.The purpose of the
video was to make African militia leader, Joseph Kony, and his crimes known worldwide
so that we would be arrested by the end of 2012.After the video was released, everyone was
talking about it and it even led to a resolution by the United States Senate.I was actually involved in a group project
for my Rhetoric and Civic life class, in which we created a video about the
invisible children organization and how they used the Kony2012 video to spread
awareness.Another example, the ALS ice
bucket challenge was started by the ALS Association to spread awareness about
the neurodegenerative disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and increase
donations.The challenge was to either
donate $50 or donate $5, dump a bucket of ice water over your head, and post a
video of it on Facebook challenging your friends to do the same.The challenge was all over the news and
everyone was talking about it.The ALS
association reported that the ice bucket challenge led to donations of about
$115 million.
These two campaigns
which took advantage of social media were incredibly successful and demonstrate
how activism has changed as a result of advancing technology.However, I would also argue that the success
of these campaigns was also dependent on the organizations choice to use media
and the general public’s choice to participate.Remember the social constructionist theory posits technology depends on our
uses, the context, and the application to bring about social change.So although the internet and social media
have given us a new way to promote causes, I believe we also construct the way
we use this technology.
