---
# System prepended metadata

title: Reading Responses (Set 2)

---

# Reading Responses (Set 2)
- Checklist for a [good reading response](https://reagle.org/joseph/zwiki/Teaching/Best_Practices/Learning/Writing_Responses.html) of 250-350 words
- [ ] Begin with a punchy start.
- [ ] Mention specific ideas, details, and examples from the text and earlier classes.
- [ ] Offer something novel that you can offer towards class participation.
- [ ] Check for writing for clarity, concision, cohesion, and coherence.
- [ ] Send to professor with “hackmd” in the subject, with URL of this page and markdown of today’s response.


## Reading responses 5 out of 5

### Nov 1 Tue - Finding someone & living alone

Maybe everyone is guilty of at least a *tiny* bit of self-misrepresentation, especially when it comes to online scenarios. With social media gaining more and more users by the day, it's almost inevitable we'll scroll past some photoshopped pictures, altered status updates, overexagerrated comments, or something of the sort. What's the harm? Maybe not much, but OkCupid and Derek Thompson shed some light on the problematic nature of this seemingly harmless habit when it comes to online dating. Considering OkCupid itself is a dating app, its article provides refreshing perspectives on some of the common lies they see from behind the scenes-- essentially exposing some of their own users. For example, they mention the rounding up of heights, especially in male accounts, exagerrated reported incomes, and lies on self claimed "recent" photos. These can also contribute to the general notion expressed by Thompson that matchmaking sites takes away our closest family and friends as key intermediaries. Because they typically would've acted as kind of aauthenticators of us-- vouching for our character, traits, intentions, etc., taking them out of the process allows for these indescrepancies to occur. As partner expectations are skyrocketing, finding a partner is simultaneously getting more difficult in many aspects. 

In Chamie's article on Americans living alone, he explores a variety of pros and cons that come with this lifestyle. While it offers freedom and privacy, it poses risk of loneliness, detachment, and higher costs. With the increasing amount of individuals who live alone, it's intriguing to draw connections between this separation from others and growing adoption of online dating sites. When we aren't consistently exposed to other people, there's naturally much less opportunity for networking and meeting new people, thus making it harder to find a romantic partner. Or perhaps, more and more people are perfectly fine with not seeking out a significant other at all. This very likely also leads to the gradual trend of people getting married later, in comparison previous generations. 

Another interesting article on [HuffPost](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dating-app-problems_l_5e39bb35c5b6ed0033adad4c) by Brittany Wong lists out the top online dating issues that individuals complain about in therapy. The first complaint brought in by many clients is this idea that "being on dating apps feels like a part-time job" (Wong). This seems very counter-intuitive in a way, especially since the whole idea of meeting people, flirting, engaging in friendly conversation should be seen as entertaining and a fun pastime, not a chore. If this dating app burnout is so widely seen, it makes me wonder how many users on these matchmaking sites are more so on there because they feel like they have to, not because they want to. With this negative air around being on these platforms in the first place, it's even less likely people will form genuine connections and successfully find the spark they're looking for.

### Nov 4 Fri - Ads & social graph background

In a frenzy to build brand awareness in an age with such media saturation, companies are doing everything in their power to promote themselves in any way they can. The result is highly technical and almost scarily intelligent online advertising tactics. Through popups, banners, user-friendly websites, sponsorships, and social media platforms, marketers use various tracking tools to effectively optimize resources. The reading by Stokes outlines some challenges that come with this though-- that consumers are experiencing advertising fatigue. Thus, more and more individuals are actually ignoring adverts, for they seem to just keep getting more intrusive. The [Vox video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFyaW50GFOs) describes the development of cookies as sort of the solution to the internet being like Dory from Finding Nemo-- having short term memory loss. But with all these technological advancements to serve us more personalized ads, tech giants and huge platforms like Facebook and Google have gathered such immense amounts of information about us that we can never really get back. The idea that any real change can only be implemented through legislative action regarding this issue is quite scary. 

This topic also reminds me of the documentary "The Social Dilemma," which discusses the human mind's addiction to social media and this constant state of being "connected." With so much tracking intelligence and adverts tailored to social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram, the documentary brings forth a significant point that there's a certain level of addiction built into the very system and interface of these sites. With a steady influx of notifications and personalized advertising, they have their own goals. And in an effort to pursue their own agendas, companies and marketers are essentially using our own psychology against us. 

### Nov 8 Tue - Manipulated

If there's one thing we should know about social media algorithms by now, it's that people are always trying everything in their power to cheat it-- to beat platforms at their own game. [Forsey's article](https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/instagram-pods) on Hubspot discussing Instagram pods poses the example of companies wanting the boost in engagement that a pod can induce, but also keeping in mind that getting caught would greatly harm their brand integrity. With so much inauthentic engagement nowadays, audiences are forced to second-guess nearly everything they encounter on the internet, and this ranges from customer reviews to news articles. To avoid making poor purchase decisions, many individuals (like myself) rely on other user comments and ratings, especially when it comes to "things sight unseen," as mentioned in [Reagle's excerpt](https://readingthecomments.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/1cubrkat/release/2) from Chapter 3. This also can be a result of various motives, from fakers who initially didn't mean any harm but then turned to attack others, to idelogical reviews, to astroturfing, to more. While some instances didn't start with ill intent, the end result unfortunately ends up being fairly similar. 

Now that companies have the power and resources to fake and/or manipulate these testimonials, it can be detrimental to businesses who do in fact use genuine reviews. It becomes less likely that the public will believe them. On the flip side, there may be instances where manipulated online ratings and reviews are spread around unknowingly by other users who fall for them, thus increasing the exposure. This relates to an earlier lesson where we discussed misinformation-- the spread of false or misleading information without knowing so. Manipulation of comments and rankings can easily give way to cases of misinformation on the internet. In order to make truly informed decisions and ensure that what we're digesting is honest and accurate, the best way is to do proper research on the user and organization involved, and the relationship between them. 

### Nov 29 Tue - Collapsed content

The concept of online authenticity is a strange one. It implies that there is a way to replicate face-to-face mannerisms and physical ways of being on the internet--- a place with pretty much zero physical presence. Like how [boyd](https://tiara.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Marwick_boyd_TweetHonestly.pdf) describes it, technology compresses multiple audiences into single contexts. In result of this, we create our own versions of an "imagined audience" to try and mimick a sense of multiplicity. A common byproduct this produces is some sort of self-modifying to match our profiles to who we envision ourselves to be or who we wish to be, rather than who we actually are. Thus, social media platforms make it increasingly difficult to truly be authentic, whether purposely or not. 

To make up for this, there are those trying to generate some sense of authenticity online--- for example, the app BeReal. As mentioned by Duffy and Gerrard in their [Wired article](https://www.wired.com/story/bereal-doomed-online-authenticity/), the platform's initiative demonstrates the attempt to battle "social media fatigue" by promoting an informal, spontaenous feel to networking platforms. As a user of BeReal myself, I can agree with the sentiment that it does promote a more lighthearted and intimate feel to its interface and overall function. People generally put much less effort into the photos they upload, especially since it's only shared with close friends they choose to add. On the other hand, I also know plenty of people who tried the app and then deleted it, saying it was useless and never really found themselves participating to begin with. With this split in attitude, I think the future of BeReal and apps like it may still be up in the air. However, I believe the initiative and intent behind it is harmless. After all, if it works, then it works. 

### Dec 06 Tue - Pushback

The concept of technology pushback seems to be increasing. Almost an contradiction, the more advanced and connected these platforms grow to be, the more wary we become of them--- even though that was the initial goal in the first place. As listed in the study conducted by Gomez and Morrison, the five main motivations and behaviors that are associated with pushback include emotional dissatisfaction, addiction, privacy, social agreement, tech control, behavior adaptation, etc. Users often find themselves feeling overwhelmed with the amount of stimuli, resulting in information overload, resistance, techno-stress, and ultimately disconnecting. An example of this is the resistance against comments in online spaces. People would rather shut off that aspect of interaction on the internet due to the negative byproducts it can often bring, whether they're warranted or not. Reagle describes this phenomenon as individuals sometimes preferring "not to look into the online reflecting glass of humanity" to avoid "feeling a little worse about themselves" ([Reagle 2019](https://readingthecomments.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/4nufia50/release/3)). This practice is understandable, especially considering the amount of online hate and bullying nowadays, as we discussed in earlier class sessions. 

Many individuals are seen to be taking a step back from social media and the internet, be it your average user or extremely popular influencers with massive followings. Some of my friends have felt the need to deactivate their accounts for a period of time for the sake of their mental health--- especially from TikTok and Instagram. The amount of stimulation these apps give can be extremely damaging, and it's important to recognize when it becomes too much for oneself. According to Valko in her [article](https://highlysensitiverefuge.com/how-social-media-affects-the-highly-sensitive-brain/) on *Highly Sensitive Refuge*, it causes the comparison game, ignites FOMO (fear of missing out), and emotional hangover, especially to highly sensitive people. In fact, a study conducted in 2012 revealed that "the size of someone's online network is closely linked to how the brain processes social thoughts," suggesting the very likely possibility that the brain finds it difficult to distinguish online relationships from offline ones (Valko 2021). Consequently, it makes us feel like we should always be doing more and looking a different way. In reality, we shouldn't be absorbing so much data and information about this many people's lives at once. The normalization of this is one of the biggest contributors to technology pushback. 