Facebook. It redefined what a friend is. It revolutionized communication. It broke the rules of social boundaries and personal space. And it’s not stopping there. On its own website, facebook brags about its ever-growing domination of interpersonal communication: “More than 500 million active users/ 50% of our active users log on to Facebook in any given day/Average user has 130 friends/People spend over 700 billion minutes per month on Facebook.” Such facts suggest that facebook dominates, or at least claims to, a significant part of our social lives. But what happens to one’s self as one exits the internet browser and encounters face-to-face interaction?
In this essay, I will attempt to unlock a deeper understanding of the connection between facebook and the effects it has on individualism in the world outside of profile pictures, statuses, “likes” and groups. I’ll attempt to answer the following: Does the same person translate from on-screen to real life? What changes in self-expression result from using facebook? And where is the individual? For the last question, I will attempt to locate the self within society which people wish to identify with most and how it was displaced with the arrival of facebook. Put simply, where does one’s social loyalties lie? No pun intended.
Before there was Facebook, Myspace, AOL, the internet, or even phones, most communication was accomplished face-to-face. As far back as man developed language, there was an intimate relationship between culture and interaction. The only way to interact was to talk with someone. And this was so up until the written word, where communication was made more convenient, efficient, and distant. There became a hierarchy of control, as evinced by the Egyptian “megamachine” where orders could be written, architecture planned on a blueprint, and communications passed down rather than the burdensome, direct interaction.
Later down the line came the printing press, the telephone, the television, and where we are now, the internet. Patterns developed over time where mankind limited his/her appearance in public and/or direct personal interaction to that which met the requirement of the needs of any given era, and rarely much more. For example, with the integration of the television inside of most households, it became uncustomary for families to have game nights, frequent trips to the park or family outings. A recent survey said that only five per cent of families said they never watch television together (Sims) and it is no surprise with the ever-growing need for efficiency and productivity in a post-industrial society. They just don’t have the time or energy to do the socially “intensive” task of interaction.
Then social networking, specifically facebook, came along, a network that allowed for interpersonal communication without the arduous challenge of leaving the comfort of one’s house. So we arrive now at the present-day circumstances as a result of a pattern of simplification, rationalization and shifts in culture. It is now more acceptable to text someone or message them on facebook than to call them or hand-write a letter addressed to them. Convenience has led to tradition, or so it would seem, unless one were to observe that, with respect to communication, convenience is tradition.
So it is evident that a great portion of time and communication is dedicated on the website of facebook.com between “friends”. But is there a different person behind the profile picture? Through observation, I have noticed the answer is yes, somewhat. Take a facebook user which I will name Fred. Fred, in social venues, is energetic, enthusiastic, and a bit over-the-top in his real-life interactions. I notice he is spontaneous and generally driven on impulse which tends to intimidate those who do not know him very well. On facebook however, he has all the time he needs to collect his thoughts, take a profile picture that imitates a reflective personality, leave inspirational quotes as statuses, leave the most benevolent comments on friends’ walls, and write long, contemplative pieces as a note for the public to see.
What about facebook creates this paradox? For one, there is the fact that face-to-face interactions are often in small groups. On facebook though, your information is accessible to all of your friends, averaging 110 people to put on a show for. That’s a lot of pressure to abide by social norms and strictly avoid anything that would offset the perfect “image” of oneself. It’s almost like stage fright in front of a large audience, except this time the stage can be manipulated.
Another difference is that, of the numerous facebook friends one may have, only a small percentage are actually close. Therefore, one is reaching out, generally, to an audience which one is not entirely comfortable with. Being thus estranged from familiarity with one’s audience, there is increased pressure not to embarrass oneself or give off an image which one would not want a stranger to see.
In face-to-face interactions, there is a certain tone, script, and composure that one must maintain. On facebook, there’s no way of telling what mood one is trying to convey. This leads to self-censorship online, something used to deter oneself from misconstruing one’s message to the public. There tends to be an online vocabulary that simplifies emotions and phrases as not to confuse the audience. It proves so effective that the very acronyms developed for use online are used in face-to-face interactions, where people sometimes spell out “el-oh-el”, “bee-tee dubs”, etc.
But we are the same on facebook in some respects. The same way we walk alone down a crowded street and don’t normally break out fervently dancing salsa, we don’t step out of our boundaries on facebook by commenting on unfamiliar friends’ pages. We don’t typically send a friend request to strangers, and we don’t poke people. Such things maintain the awkwardness from real life into the social network.
Subsequently, is one the same on facebook as one is in real life? This requires a complex, case-by-case analysis, but the most certain analysis is never quite the same. There are always idiosyncrasies and mannerisms unique to face-to-face interactions as there are personas we adopt on facebook. These aren’t necessarily bad, just different. It’s a sign showing that the human adaptation reflex is working. There is a problem when one cannot decipher between facebook and reality, where one should draw the line, and when facebook becomes more real than face-to-face interactions, but these are troublesome cases that require more in-depth analysis. One needs to be able to critically analyze his/her social life to discern what one values more and therefore which self is authentic: the facebook self or the face-to-face self. It’s evident, though, that face-to-face interactions are quickly becoming wall-to-wall.
No comments:
Post a Comment