The Daily Bones

TAG | Facebook

May/10

2

The Social Problems of “Social” Media

A flurry of blog posts have been written around the pros and cons of “social” media lately given the newly introduced Open Graph on Facebook.  What seems to be ignored, however, is the sustainability of such a system and its impacts on the growth of younger generations.

My generation experienced the rise of sites like Facebook and MySpace while we were in college.  We were the original target market for Facebook and contributed directly to the rapid and viral success.  The value in social media lies in the ability of someone to utilize the efficiencies created by these tools as a complement to their day to day interactions with friends.  Our generation understands that social media is not a replacement for phone calls and rendezvous, but as an enabler for maintaining relationships with people all over the world, whom we may not be able to meet with easily in real life.

For the next generation of kids, this understanding may not be so clear.  My chief concern is for the less outgoing kids who now have a low risk option for meeting new friends.  Developing relationships through technology is fine, but not when it’s in an asynchronous manner.

“Social” is more of a loose description of the trend than an appropriate name.  The interactions between people on these sites are generally asynchronous in nature.  If I want to check up on a friend, I have the ability to simply log into a web site, search for his or her name, and track their most recent life events.  I see all of their photos from their latest trip to Europe.  I find out they’re no longer dating that girl from college.  In no way was I required to interact with this person to find out the most recent news about their life.  No chance of rejection.  No feeling of connection.  No risk and no reward.  No social interaction.

If a relationship was developed chiefly through this manner, it is really a pseudo relationship.  I’m no psychologist, but I’d venture to say this would have a fairly drastic impact on the social development of these individuals.

The heart of the problem is the one-sided nature of Facebook and Twitter and the increasingly low barrier to entry to gain access to personal information.  The act of “friending” a person on a social networking site has become easier than saying “hello” to a stranger for some people.  This request is the only point at which rejection can occur, and the chances are minuscule that the request will be denied if you’ve at least become an acquaintance of the person.  From this point on, you can now access whatever they choose to make public (and even some things that they don’t directly intend to publish) without them ever knowing.

All of the risks are removed.  Those who have gone through adolescence without the crutch of social networking sites have gone through the turbulent period of social development known as grades 6-12.  Facebook provides a segment of the generation an easy alternative to taking social risks, and many will give in to these temptations.  I suppose we won’t know exactly how this will affect the following generations until it may be too late, but isn’t that always the case?

You could argue that my generation experienced something similar with the widespread use of instant messaging. Just like kids now, we could hide behind a computer screen to have an acceptable and relatively risk free alternative to approaching the cute girl after class.  Until the massive growth and usage of Facebook, the conversation through a computer was at least reasonably real time and direct.  Sure, you couldn’t see the expression of the individual with whom you were speaking, or hear the tone of their voice either.  But it was direct communication that generally required immediate response, so I’ll consider that as an improvement over the way the internet functions socially today.  (And really, this is one of the most valuable features of the internet age for keeping in touch).

Call me a traditionalist, attempting to stick up for the status quo, but I’d disagree.  I merely hope that the potential pitfalls of the widespread misuse of these tools will not lead to a generation of people sitting behind screens (familiar to those who have the seen the movie Wall-E) communicating with everyone but those nearby.

Technology affords us great efficiencies, but they shouldn’t be applied to a social context.  A huge difference exists between increasing the transparency and speed of a supply chain process and allowing personal information to exchange hands openly and with little barriers.  Too many social implications and risks exist for us to allow it (stalking, domestic abuse, etc).

· ·