# Reading Response 1
Being on a dating app is like endlessly scrolling through baseball cards of people where you rarely have the potential to make a real life connection. It is that mindless swiping and quick judging that can sabotage or expedite the formation of a relationship. As referenced in “Why Online Dating Can Feel Like Such an Existential Nightmare” by Daniel Thompson, in today’s world of hookup culture and swiping, digital communication has changed the relational landscape by turning it into a solo expedition. In this article it is discussed how before digital communications were prevalent, the relational landscape consisted of setups by the people who know us best. However with the rise of dating apps, relations comeby through the act of the prospect searching on their own. However, there are issues when it comes to the representation of the prospects digitally. There is a new sense of falseness that has been introduced into the relational landscape, as mentioned in “The Big Lies People Tell In Online Dating”. When communicating digitally there is a screen to hide behind, meaning that little lies about one’s appearance may not seem like a big deal. The relational landscape echoes these lies by gaining a sense of mistrust due to digital communication. With this change in the relational landscape, comes changes in the common lifestyles of adults. Because digital communication has altered the frequency in which relationships work out and prosper, it has become acceptable to marry much later in life and to focus on other aspects of life before settling down. This idea is reflected in “Living alone in America” by Joseph Chamie. Chamie dictates that it is increasingly common for adults to live alone much later into life as a result of the changing social norms. I see that this plays into the idea that digital communication has changed the relational landscape because it has altered how likely it is that someone is in a relationship which they would like to live with long term. These are all reasons why digital communication has affected the modern relationship.

# Reading Response 2
We are all being watched. 3rd party cookies make it possible for websites to collect information about us so they can display ads that they think we want to see. In the video “How ads follow you around the internet” by Vox, the speaker mentions the idea of a pair of shoes following you around. All of the main types of advertisements available rely on these 3rd party cookies to collect information about what we are searching for and then display it to us all over the different sites we visit on the web. This is how advertisers make their money, they figure if you were looking for it on a different site, seeing it on another site could make you more likely to buy it. The video also describes how big sites like Facebook can guarantee this information to advertisers by making it impossible to block 3rd party cookies by disguising them as 1st party cookies. Advertisers can be sure that you are seeing their content so they can make their money.
So what forms do advertisements appear in? According to “eMarketing” by Rob Stokes, there are many different forms. The form referenced in Vox’s video is banner ads. Ads will show up on the top of a site you are visiting, most likely displaying information that you gave the advertiser unknowingly. Next up, we have pop ups. These are ads that show up because they have been built into a site. They show up in a new window, forcing you to give them attention for a few seconds. Floating adverts follow a similar concept but remain in the same window and will be able to be closed. Wallpaper adverts stay on the page not hindering your view and staying in your periphery. Finally we have map adverts which are using 3rd party cookies with information about your location. They recommend you stuff in an area that you are in. All of these ads can be scarily tailored to your internet viewing history in a way that allows the advertiser to benefit off of us as much as possible.

# Reading Response 3

If you open a browser and search for literally anything, the content you receive will be based on an algorithm. I have always known, in the back of my mind, that the search results that google generates have some bias behind them. In highschool I was extremely involved in studio art, this meant I would constantly be scouring google images for reference photos of hands, legs, and faces. While I always tended to draw my characters as Indian, all of the reference images that I had to work with were predominantly white. The article “Here’s Why Some People Think Google’s Results Are Racist” by Fiona Rutherford describes this almost exactly. It appears that the search results are predisposed to show images of white people, regardless of the lack of racial specification. This is an example of how the algorithm that google images uses is exhibiting bias. I would love to say that this is not an intentional bias, but part of me just cannot. In my opinion, the mass media has always brought white figures to the forefront over people of color. Popular characters in books and movies were almost always white while I was growing up. This indicates, to me, that this may have been where these algorithms picked up these biases. The popularity of white figures has caught the attention of algorithms, causing them to inadvertently bring white images to the forefront of most unspecified searches. The classification of these popular figures as ideal, may also have contributed to typical characteristics of POC showing up in searches that are looking for results that show the lesser ideal, as referenced by Rutherford in terms of professionalism as a search term.

In “Weapons of Math Destruction” by Cathy O’Neil it is discussed whether the algorithms that run the internet are overcoming bias or simply finding ways to expedite and cover it up. She explores how a bias being determined can then cause it to subsequently be reinforced. She references several real world cases of this and proves to me that bias is certainly a thing that can be learned, by a person and an algorithm. This makes sense as even when inadvertent, we know that algorithms tend to pull similar results into the spotlight again and again, which is clearly a form of learned behavior.

# Reading Response 4
Being authentic online is an oxymoron. Being behind a screen immediately gives way to inauthenticity. We are constantly told that everyone is putting their best foot forward on social media as a way to ward off comparisons to people’s lives that just are not realistic. In “BeReal and the Doomed Quest for Online Authenticity” by Brook Duffy and Ysabel Gerard, the authenticity behind BeReal is discussed. As a daily user of the app, I can see the intention behind it, but I also see right through it. Duffy and Gerard explain how the app was created in order to be the first app to reveal people’s authentic selves to their followers in order to combat the curative nature of other social media apps. I can directly attest to this app being used for the exact opposite reason. There have been moments where I am with my friends, quite honestly doing nothing, and the BeReal notification shows up. From the silence that we have been sitting in, one of my friends would say, “I’m saving my BeReal for when we are doing something tonight.” Not so real, huh? This follows along with Duff and Gerard’s claim that BeReal isn't going to be the undoing of the curated nature of social media. It is just the new, exciting platform that people are going to use for some fleeting time.

It is certainly possible to have more than one persona online. However, the means of doing so is very different from having different personas in real life. In “I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience” by Marwick and boyd it is discussed how individuals conduct themselves differently in different social settings, which makes complete sense. However, they also discuss the rigidity of social media profiles, in the sense that they only allow for one persona to be portrayed. I disagree with this idea because to me, these profiles allow for the switching of personas. I for one have a main instagram account and another account that I use to just communicate with close friends. The content I post on these 2 accounts are completely opposite, an example of 2 personas for 2 different audiences of mine. This idea also tracks to different social media sites and my different accounts there. I certainly portray myself differently on snapchat than instagram, because I know that my audience differs.

# Reading Response 5

Being behind a screen allows practically anyone to portray themselves any which way. There is a big responsibility that comes with the power of holding a large platform on the internet. Influencers have so many people interacting with their content, looking up to them, and taking their advice. You would think this means that they would feel a certain responsibility for the quality and authenticity of the content that they post. The unfortunate reality is that some do and some simply do not care. We discussed authenticity in class, and during that discussion I found it hard to define what authenticity was, but in cases of influencers spreading misinformation I can safely say that the authentic thing to do would be to give everyone the correct facts and work to educate yourself if do don’t have them correct, especially if you are holding a large platform. I believe that these influencers with large platforms, especially ones with particularly vulnerable audiences, should feel that they are being held to a certain standard, because that is the right thing to do. I know that I am not the only one that feels this way.

The most essential text that was assigned today was “Policing “Fake” Femininity: Authenticity, Accountability, and Influencer Anti Fandom” by Duffy, Miltner, and Wahlstedt. This text referenced an “anti fandom” of mostly women who called themselves GOMI (Get Off My Internet). This group feels strongly about the spread of fake information, false advertising, and curated personas that popular influencers tend to spread and embody on today’s internet. The people that they are talking about? Well I can say with a good amount of confidence, are the influencers that are being referenced in “Rising Instagram Stars Are Posting Fake Sponsored Content” by Taylor Lorenz. Lorenz references several content creators who create unsponsored content that looks sponsored so that they can portray themselves as an influencer that many brands are vying to work with. This in turn creates a totally unrealistic idea of how influential and how popular these influencers really are, and the reason why GOMI wants them gone. However there is a separate genre of content creators who allow morals to take the front seat rather than the money and fame they could be gaining. Influencers as such are described in “Social media influencers are balancing ‘authentic’ messaging during protests and the pandemic” by Rachel Lerman. The influencers that are described in this text are much more likely to fit GOMI’s idea of what an influencer should be like. The content creators described in this text dedicated themselves to causes that needed attention during the pandemic rather than letting their platforms take precedence. This showed that there can be a balance between authenticity and influential platforms.