Social Media and Our Well-Being

Social media is or becoming a large part of our lives. It is affecting how we are, how we connect with people, and how we find information. With such a powerful tool at our disposal, the constant need to want to check in daily (whether by participating or passively grazing) is affecting our well-being. I remember a couple of years ago I decided to take a couple months off of using Facebook. To touch on a point in the article “Will Facebook Make You Sad? Depends On How You Use it,” I passively used the site, which entails “…just browsing through photographs of other people’s happy moments, reading people’s conversations, and not contributing anything.” By not actively participating, I felt this pressure of comparing myself more to other people. I wasn’t posting much, and I didn’t receive any feedback, which meant I wasn’t able to feel validated on how I was living my life. So, I deactivated Facebook for a summer and did some “soul-searching.” My time away from this time-consuming site led me to enjoy life more. I wasn’t so focused on wanting to know every little thing about people’s lives. I learned to just live out my life without having to worry about comparing myself to others (online that is). I eventually came back to Facebook, but with a different perspective. In reality, there isn’t a perfect idea of success or happiness. Everyone will achieve these ideals in their own ways, and it’s not necessary for me to compare my progress down this path to others. 

Also, I do know a person who overshares and I just want to pull my hair out every time they post, but I’m unwilling to unfollow them. Maybe it’s because there’s a feeling of not wanting to miss out on information or a social connection with someone. Like the article “The Problem Isn’t Over-Sharing. It’s Over-Following” says, I would rather complain about their actions than to completely unfollow them. Until I’m willing to lose a connection with someone, I will continue to cringe as they constantly update about their "exciting life" in my newsfeed. 

The Effects of Being Constantly Connected

Our desire to want to be constantly connected to the online world has a way of creating negative effects for the offline world. Smart phones allow us to be readily available to information in an instant. Wherever we go, people will always fill the void by being glued to their phones. People have a tendency to be engaged with their smart phones while walking to a destination, waiting for a class, eating food, or even while driving! It’s frightening to think about how dependent we are on this technology. Knowing this, I believe that this technological fixation and this desire to not want to miss out on information are causing us to be detached from the world around us. It’s beginning to get more and more difficult to have a genuine conversation with someone without being distracted by our phones. I always make an effort to never have my phone out whenever I’m conversing with someone. There was a time where we were able to live without smart phones; now I wonder if there will ever be a time in the future where we won’t be so dependent on them.

To look more on the social media aspect of instant gratification, I agree with the fact that the use of social media is reinforcing this concept. Social media allows us to consume a lot of information quickly, even if it’s meaningless to us. In the long term, I don’t believe we retain everything we read on social media. We are able to quickly look through our news feed and not even remember what we read by the end of the day. This fast-pace environment is enabling us to want to multi-task. Multi-tasking may make us feel productive, but it’s actually hindering our ability to focus all of our mental energy into one task. I will admit that I struggled a bit to write this post, because I was distracted by social media. After reading the articles and understanding the content from my view point, I see the combination of instant gratification and technology as a deadly combination. I don’t think this need to want to be constantly connected is healthy for us. We need to take breaks from our devices, and just enjoy the world around us.

Silencing Our Opinions

I believe the spiral of silence theory can play a huge effect on how people use social media. Social media makes it easy to gauge how many people are able to view your thoughts. Whether it’s the amount of friends you have (Facebook) or followers (Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr, etc.), knowing these numbers can play a factor on voicing minority opinions. Online, I can see how users may be able to easily see the diversity of opinions within their social circles. Users will be able to see whether people are for or against their opinion. By knowing this, people can choose their battles, and if people oppose their minority opinion, then this leads into the spiral of silence theory. When looking at one's social circles, people may also surround themselves in an echo chamber. This chamber makes it to where they only voice their thoughts when they know that other people are able to reinforce it. It makes this cookie cutter template as to what is the “norm." It doesn't allow different opinions to be introduced, and this isn't conducive to the idea of change. Only allowing majority opinions to surface isn't vital to progressing in society. 

By conforming to the majority opinion, possibility for change is significantly hindered. It creates this notion that there will always be one correct thought, and anyone opposing it must be wrong (reminds me of the exuding patriotism in the “Buying the War” video). I believe that people need to voice their opinion, even if it’s in the minority. In order to better formulate an opinion, I believe that people need to be introduced to different perspectives. Even if it makes one feel isolated or alone, receiving feedback is a necessity to forming an identity and to grow as a person. 

The Illusion of Truth

After watching “Buying the War,” it is unnerving to see how powerful the news media has on framing information. President Bush and his administration had a specific agenda, and the news media just conformed to their ideals. Anyone who didn’t agree with the popular view (to go to war) would be seen as being unpatriotic. Journalists were afraid to stand up, because they feared of getting a reputation as a “trouble maker.” Even if they did go against the grain, would anyone support their opposing views? Regardless, these journalists should've voiced their opinions, instead of letting the popular opinion control their actions.

So who bought the war? Well, I believe everyone who didn’t research the evidence were persuaded. Americans looked to the news, be it print or media, and they used these sources as their resources for information. For journalists, I would say that the majority bought the war or they bought this idea because they were too afraid to have opposing views. New media’s coverage of 9/11 created this idea that America was attacked. America was the victim, and Americans needs to do something about this unjust attack. In created this connection of exuding patriotism by fighting back against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Most left and right media narratives were the same after 9/11, because they feared of going against the popular view, which was to go to war in Iraq. Those who broke away from this view would lose credibility and become shunned away. Ahmed Chalabi manipulated the U.S. news media with his Iraq defectors. These defectors would create falsified evidence that motivated Americans to continue pursuing the war on Iraq. Chalabi told false information to both the administration and the press, in order to create the illusion of two sources (when really there was only one). His manipulation shows how easy it is to frame information they want one would want it to be shown.

Priming and Gender Constructs

Society has ingrained in us these concepts of what is “feminine” and what is “masculine.” Sometimes when people break through these socially created gender constructs they make us feel uncomfortable or confused by these nonconforming actions. Along with these gender constructs, there is this idea of the patriarchal system in which men have dominance over women. In this hierarchy, men are seen as having more advantages over women in social, economic, and political institutions. In regards to the reading about men feeling threatened by women accomplishing more than them, I can see and understand why men may feel and react this way. These changes primes men into accessing these schemas that were formulated by societal ideals. They no longer feel that they have control over women like they’re supposed to, and it makes them “uncomfortable or confused.” Are these reactions based on conscious or subconscious beliefs?

The idea of priming makes me wonder about how much control we have over our actions and thoughts. Whether we realize this or not, we are surrounded by many stimuli wherever we go and we are constantly being influenced because of this. When I think about it, reading this article primed me to recall information I learned in a different class in order to make these gender associations. Priming is an interesting effect, and it makes me wonder about the different ways we can use this concept to benefit ourselves or others.