Does social media encourage unnatural levels of conformity?
Trogluddite wrote:
The only social media I use are Wrong Planet, occasionally a couple of other autism forums, and some forums relating very specifically to certain special interests (one of which I moderate.)
My impression is that the main down-sides of social media (and I do think there can also be up-sides) are...
- People prefer to be agreed with than to be disagreed with, generally speaking. Online it's very easy to hang out only with people who agree with you, and software which suggests "what you might also like" encourages this. The fact that you're just communicating via text messages, and can be relatively anonymous, also lessens the negative consequences of a disagreement which turns into a full-blown argument - you can just "ghost" people instead of resolving the problem. Compromising with people and resolving disputes are skills which take practice, and it's much easier to avoid practising online than it is when socialising is done in a real-world public space.
- Statistics for "likes", "re-tweets" and "followers" encourage people to measure their sociability in dysfunctional ways and to treat socialising as little more than a game. They emphasise "popularity" over empathy, and the relative anonymity makes it easier for many people to mask who they really are for the sake of popularity.
- They encourage people to keep up a continuous stream of short messages rather than to discuss anything in depth. You can't get to know someone properly through "me too"s, "+1"s, follows, re-tweets, and sound-bites. Re-tweets, links to videos, etc. encourage the recycling of other people's opinions rather than questioning and explaining one's own opinions and why one holds them. The pressure to respond promptly encourages people to post before thinking things through. So people's understanding of each other remains relatively superficial, which discourages empathy (there are more people on WP who I'd love to see write more than people who I would prefer wrote less.)
I don't think that any of the above are unique to social media. Relentless exposure to stereotypes in advertising and entertainment media are just as pernicious in my opinion - just as superstition and religious persecution have been in various places and at various times. I don't think that the degree of conformity is "unnatural", in the sense that for most people it's a normal psychological reaction to the amount of pressure which they feel under, and their perception of what the consequences of not conforming might be.
My impression is that the main down-sides of social media (and I do think there can also be up-sides) are...
- People prefer to be agreed with than to be disagreed with, generally speaking. Online it's very easy to hang out only with people who agree with you, and software which suggests "what you might also like" encourages this. The fact that you're just communicating via text messages, and can be relatively anonymous, also lessens the negative consequences of a disagreement which turns into a full-blown argument - you can just "ghost" people instead of resolving the problem. Compromising with people and resolving disputes are skills which take practice, and it's much easier to avoid practising online than it is when socialising is done in a real-world public space.
- Statistics for "likes", "re-tweets" and "followers" encourage people to measure their sociability in dysfunctional ways and to treat socialising as little more than a game. They emphasise "popularity" over empathy, and the relative anonymity makes it easier for many people to mask who they really are for the sake of popularity.
- They encourage people to keep up a continuous stream of short messages rather than to discuss anything in depth. You can't get to know someone properly through "me too"s, "+1"s, follows, re-tweets, and sound-bites. Re-tweets, links to videos, etc. encourage the recycling of other people's opinions rather than questioning and explaining one's own opinions and why one holds them. The pressure to respond promptly encourages people to post before thinking things through. So people's understanding of each other remains relatively superficial, which discourages empathy (there are more people on WP who I'd love to see write more than people who I would prefer wrote less.)
I don't think that any of the above are unique to social media. Relentless exposure to stereotypes in advertising and entertainment media are just as pernicious in my opinion - just as superstition and religious persecution have been in various places and at various times. I don't think that the degree of conformity is "unnatural", in the sense that for most people it's a normal psychological reaction to the amount of pressure which they feel under, and their perception of what the consequences of not conforming might be.
Very, very well put. Which basically amounts to a +1/like I guess
_________________
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Very, very well put. Which basically amounts to a +1/like I guess
As soon as I'd pressed "submit", I thought to myself; "that's an open invitation for some cheekiness, you fool!"
_________________
When you are fighting an invisible monster, first throw a bucket of paint over it.
BenderRodriguez wrote:
You still made some excellent points
Thankyou. Having to deal with all kinds of trollishness as a forum moderator has encouraged me to ponder such things, I think (though my task is somewhat easier than for the moderators on WP, I suspect! )
_________________
When you are fighting an invisible monster, first throw a bucket of paint over it.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
SCOTUS and Social Media Laws |
27 Feb 2024, 5:31 pm |
Trump Media Says It's Starting a Social Streaming Service |
21 Apr 2024, 8:11 pm |
Social And Relationships |
08 Feb 2024, 5:23 pm |
Social Worker |
12 Mar 2024, 5:26 pm |