# Reading Responses (Set 2)

#### 11/01/2022

How has digital communication changed the relational landscape?

Online dating in the digital age has become comparable to walking down the chip isle of a grocery store. The infinite options are exciting with variety, but equally overwhelming. While technology allows connections between people who would not have met otherwise, the large number of potential connections makes interaction with each person no more special than looking through the isle of chips. The paradox of choice has affected the relational landscape in significant ways. In ["Living Alone In America,"](https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/563786-living-alone-in-america/) Chamie outlines that the proportion of adults living alone in America has "tripled to about 15 percent." While people are given more access to the world than ever before, the end result is that individuals are more isolated than before. Chamie adds that people living alone are "more likely to experience lonliness and depression," further supporting that the increase of choice does not equate to increased happiness.

Digital communication has also changed the relational landscape in a sense that the receiver must trust that the information given by an individual is true. Unfortunately, this allows room for deception and *catfishing* commonly done in dating apps. In ["The Big Lies People Tell in Online dating"](https://theblog.okcupid.com/the-big-lies-people-tell-in-online-dating-a9e3990d6ae2), the author reveals that people lie about a wide of range of ideas on their dating profiles, such as height, income, and the date of the photos taken. However, the people who choose to deceive may not always have harmful intentions. Often, we want to see ourselves as our ideal self and this translates into the way we present ourselves online. This inevitably contrasts with the real self from the perspective of others. Moreover, the success or failure from the projection of our ideal selves can significantly alter an individual's self-esteem. While the success of a person in the relational landscape may seem positive, this online interaction cannot be considered *legitimate* because deception is likely present on both sides. Similar to the isle of chips, you spend an unreasonable amount of time choosing your next snack, but ultimately leave empty-handed.

#### 11/08/2022

In what ways are online reviews, ratings, rankings, and comments manipulated? What can you trust and how would you know?

There are two types of people: the minimalist and the maximalist. The maximalist, specifically, has a **more is more** mentality that is shown in advertising and social media. In ["Which Ice Cube is the Best,"](https://readingthecomments.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/1cubrkat/release/2) of "Reading the Comments," a similar view of maximalism is seen through the author's expression of retailers' "opposite approach" to "sell everything, and let consumers sort it out. Zappos customers review and rate its ninety thousand styles of shoes." Online reviews, ratings, and rankings are strategies to direct attention to a specific product, where consumers may be confused by their unlimited options. While online reviews are necessary to sort through the availability of information, reviews can easily be manipulated by advertisers. Trusted reviews can be found through the same crap-detection skills from class discussions. Firstly, the intention of the source is important to know their reliability. Biased perspectives from those that directly benefit are unreliable sources of information.
In our individualist age, users on social media have learned to market themselves for more likes and followers on social media sites such as Instagram. The ability to capitalize on one's audience is detrimental to interaction between users within Instagram. In ["Everything You Need To Know About Instagram Pods,"](https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/instagram-pods), the author Forsey discusses her experience of "ask[ing] friends through text to like my Instagram pictures after I'd posted them" and this resulted in the realization that "they can't substitute authentic engagement." Forsey comes to this realization because she realized that the nature of Instagram is a social networking website, not an advertising platform. Instagram likes and comments were designed for others to express that they *like* something and to *express opinions on one's post*. The quantification of this experience makes the underlying intention meaningless. Ultimately, Forsey knows that the number of likes has little to do with the content of her post because they were from asking. Forsey's experience proves that maximalism is not always positive. The excess maximalism in social media interaction can lead to confusion and inauthentic connections.\

#### 11/18/2022

Most people envision themselves as the main character of the world they live in. Their perception of the world is formed with themselves at the center of it. This makes it impossible for one's perspective to be completely objective. A person's self-centered perspective becomes problematic when public policies or resources are made by a small group of people relative to the population. Specifically, if this small group only consists of white people, then the majority will be exposed to the *white perspective*. In ["Here's Why Some People Think Google's Results Are Racist,"](https://web.archive.org/web/20160412143309/http://www.buzzfeed.com/fionarutherford/heres-why-some-people-think-googles-results-are-racist#.ebL0dleml) the author describes the projection of a white perspective. For example, the Google image results of the hand largely showed images of white hands, which was not representative of the worldwide users that use Google. This gives the notion that "whiteness" is the default condition for humans, and other races are considered a variation from this normal. In fact, the difference in race between positive and negative search results shows that there was no thought to members of outgroups when making the website. While this is a clear reflection of internalized racism, the main issue is the inability to relate to others. The inability to relate causes these public resources to be catered to white people, which may result in unfortunate situations such as when black individuals in a photo were labelled "gorillas." The creation of media and culture by homogenous groups may lead to significant cultural consequences. In a cross-sectional study, researchers found that most American girls, regardless of race, had a preference for white Barbie dolls over black Barbie dolls. The most surprising outcome was that researchers found that even African American girls preferred white Barbie dolls. This shows that their perception of beauty is heavily tied to racial concepts. Because the children were exposed to the idea that beauty is tied to whiteness, they internalize this connection unconsciously. This ultimately brings negative consequences to self-concept. People will struggle to gain their individual perspective throughout development because it contrasts with the white perspective learned from society. The algorithm is far from perfect because the algorithm itself was made by humans. Humans, even without ill will, fail to be objective because we inherently carry biases. The display of bias through media ultimately brings harmful effects to users.

#### 12/02/2022

Authenticity, work, & influence

In a class of twenty kindergarteners, approximately eleven will grow up aspiring to be influencers. What was once considered an embarrassing, illegitimate profession, the occupation of *influencer* has developed to become the ideal lifestyle for the winners of life. In fact, their relevancy to the world, including to large-scale companies, is considered an important asset in the social media space. In ["Rising Instagram Stars Are Posting Fake Content,"](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/12/influencers-are-faking-brand-deals/578401/) Taylor Lorenz details that attention from sponsors is so sought after that they "stage a fake ad for a local cafe, purchasing [their] mug of coffee, photographing it, and adding a promotional caption carefully written in that particular style of ad speak." This desperation to obtain and display success in the social media space places influencers in an interesting gray area between the average person and the celebrity. The balance of these multiple identities causes their social perspective to be seen as problematic with sensitive topics. This is because influencers are the epitome of individualism in a capitalistic society that places money over morality. Their authenticity cannot be received as genuine because they market themselves to be "better" than the average person by placing themselves over the average person. In the [Washington Post article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/12/influencers-social-media-pandemic/), Rachel Lerman details Shahd Khidir's experience balancing her roles as a political scientist and influencer by "posting calls to examine privilege on her page and calling out those influencers who offensively miss the mark with their posts." This indicates that influencers are increasingly aware of public distaste towards them in situations that require the exploitation of the weak. While Khidir's background makes her a suitable critic of other influencers, the irony of the situation is clear. Khidir uses her background in political science as a badge to garner public support at the expense of other influencers. She provides the illusion that she is *on your side*. Unfortunately, this display is inauthentic because, in any other situation, she participates alongside other influencers in profiting from the masses.

People want to believe that their influencers are sensitive to real-world events and resonate with them. However, their identity and position in society make their empathy obsolete to the public. To put simply, the gravity of the Black Lives Matter movement contrasts heavily with the superficiality of an influencer's sponsored advertisements and outfit pictures. Ultimately the multidimensional identity of influencers in our society causes them to have a unique middle ground, which places them under public scrutiny.

#### 12/06/2022

Social Media

Social media and technology are like junk food for your brain. You can look for the definition of that word using a dictionary, or you can do a simple Google search. You can feel rewarded by going on a hike, or you can watch movies in the comfort of your own home. But after a while, junk food makes you sick. After people have grown increasingly dependent on their technology and started to feel overwhelmed and depressed, they adopted a *digital detox*, which promotes withdrawing from technology or the source of stress within the technology, kind of like a juice detox.


Technology has allowed us to find easy, instant solutions to our needs and this have caused us to be increasingly reliant. Gomez's sentiment on the target group that is more susceptible to technology addiction was insightful in the sense that he accounts for both younger generations, who have grown up with technology, as well as the older generation, who are adjusting to the growth of technology. He supports this notion by claiming "a number of sources that argued technology is not stressful for young people ... newer articles supported by research studies suggest pushback is very much a result of stress felt by all ages." Different generations use different modes of technology in different ways. However, the negative consequences experienced by both groups indicate that technology harms our biological well-being.

As a *digital native* myself, I resonated with the feelings of teens within the research survey who claimed they needed to disconnect from social media often.
Humans are biologically unfit to be looking at a screen for 7-8 hours a day. This artificial nature of technology in our lives was increasingly clear from our negative experiences in quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic. From this experience, we observed other around us who has lost motivation and self-esteem. Research has also shown higher cases of depression during this period. Furthermore, our modern society has experienced increased physical consequences from increased technology usage. The most significant consequences are overall increases in obesity and the decline in eyesight within our population. Negative traits gained from technology usage will be passed down to future generations, as they are heritable. The accumulation of this genetic information causes the human genome to be more prone to mutations and selection.

In a social sense, the views of our society towards technological development have shifted from fascination to functionality. We see the limitations of technology through the failure of advancements, such as the [Google glass](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Glass), which was discontinued after its release in 2013. At its peak, Snapchat also had a similar development, called the [Snapchat Spectacles](https://www.spectacles.com/shop/), which was also meant to be a revolutionary way of integrating Snapchat into our lives. While technological advancement and social media have changed the backbone of our society, we have also seen limitations in the sense that people are deterred from unfamiliar technology.


As a member of our society, I saw the sentiment of social media shift. In the early 2010s felt and others were excited about technology. Americans obsessed over Flappy Bird. Everyone was playing Candy Crush and Angry Birds.
As we became more desensitized to the developments in technology, people use technology as a means for connecting with others, rather than to use the technology itself. All in all, as people learn to grow in the environment of technology, they have realized that too much results in an unhappy life. In turn, they have found ways to place technology for their purposes, rather than to mindlessly consume media.