I wrote this essay yesterday when I was under a great deal of pressure. It's probably not that well-written, technically speaking, but I think it's a good topic to argue about.
Since the invention of the movable-type printing press in the mid-1400s to our current day and age, the media has been in a constant state of evolvement. The industry has grown from being able to produce only a few hundred books per month on a converted wine-press, to the global empire that seems to penetrate every last corner of our lives. As long as we’re capable of reading, watching, or listening, our time will be spent consuming the media in some way or another. Without even thinking, our days are sectioned off into times in which we sleep, work, and consume the media. In a research study done in 2005 by Nielson Media Research Inc. it was discovered that, on average, a person will spend four hours and thirty-two minutes per day in front of the television. That may not sound like too much at first glance, but if we break it down it becomes a staggering statistic. Spending four and a half hours per day watching television ends up meaning that approximately thirteen years of your life is wasted away in front of the tube. What’s also interesting to note is that the same amount of time you spend watching television is spent with other forms of media, like the internet or radio.
With the media being such a pervasive part of our lives, it’s safe to assume that the content that is communicated through the media has the potential to influence us both for good and bad. When we watch a violent or disturbing movie, or listen to extravagantly brutal song lyrics, we don’t consciously make a decision to let ourselves be affected by it, yet it affects us nonetheless, whether we like it or not. If we’re being ethically responsible, it’s important to manage what media we consume and what media we avoid, knowing how it will affect us.
I submit, however, that the media is not the problem that many believe it to be. Our society is filled to the brim with people looking to blame the evils of the world on something or someone. Always looking for a scapegoat, they overlook the root of the problem, even when it may be sitting right in front of their noses. When something horrific happens, be it a school shooting or a case of domestic violence, there are those who feel a degree of satisfaction upon supposedly finding the reason for it in the form of a violent video game or movie.
Michael Medved, in his acclaimed book, Hollywood vs. America, quotes Teller, one-half of the Penn and Teller comedy duo, as he claims the media doesn’t affect our behavior as we often believe:
’[. . .]those who seem to think that if we stop showing rape in movies people will stop committing it in real life. Anthropologists call this ‘magical thinking.’ It’s the same impulse that makes people stick pins in voodoo dolls, hoping to cripple an enemy. It feels logical, but it does not take into account that rape predates home video by thousands of years.
’Zealots have long tried to prove that “evil” fiction causes wickedness in the real world. But the facts fail to cooperate…Those who want us to give up our freedom disagree. They claim people are not smart enough to tell make-believe from reality. Give us a break! When one pays seven dollars to go into a theater to see big pictures moving on a wall, one does not need to be a mental giant to realize you are watching a movie. It makes you wonder how they explain the millions of people who saw Psycho without stealing bankrolls or bumping off blondes’ (241).
Whether you agree with Teller or not is your choice—you, and only you, can decide what kind of media you want to consume, be it extremely violent, extremely kiddy, or somewhere in between. There exist opposing views stating that the media does indeed affect our behavior, that if we watch something violent on television we will spontaneously become violent human beings. And even if this theory winds up being total rubbish, we still all have our own opinions and beliefs with the ability to voice them whenever and wherever we want. However, the question stands, should content that some consider “illicit” be banned from the airwaves and bit streams?
First I’d like to consider how we naturally consume our media. As a person who thrives on his hobbies—reading, video games, movies—don’t you think that I would naturally gravitate toward the kind of media that interests me the most? For example, if I like video games, would it make sense for me to spend more time reading a fashion magazine than to pass the time reading PC Gamer magazine? Of course it doesn’t, for the media we choose to consume reflects our own interests. We won’t waste time consuming a media product when we don’t expect to gain anything from it. This process is called selective exposure (Vivian). Media censorship is a ridiculous concept because what one person considers offensive, others may find fascinating. What some of us may consider morally degrading may be entertainment for others. Imposing regulations on what people can or can’t watch is removing from people the agency to decide for themselves what’s good for them and what’s “evil.”
Due to the process of selective exposure, the fact that unfavorable media exists shouldn’t affect us, for we can simply change the channel or, if it’s a movie, check the rating or a parental guide on the internet to find out what’s in it. The fact that many of us have higher moral values than others does not give us the right to forcibly impose those values on others. Doing so would be a direct challenge on the first amendment—an inspired document written by inspired Christians.
Trying to snub out what we deem inappropriate will never change a thing, anyway. I quote Brian Lowry from his article in Variety magazine, as he explains to us how the media is an unstoppable force, and we should all just get used to its pervasiveness:
Anybody who has tracked the media through its history, though, can testify to one inexorable fact: Culture never moves backward. Standards shift and taboos fall, frequently provoking howls of protest. Once released, however, the genie can’t be squeeze back into the bottle, which is especially true now given the explosion of channels and screens—including those on desktops and hand-held devices—at the consumer’s disposal (13).
According to Lowry, the media’s affect on society will continue to increase in strength, and there’s nothing we can do to halt its powerful influence. The best we can do is understand that although content exists that we don’t necessarily agree with, we’ll always have the ability to choose whether or not we want to consume it.
We have to come to grips with the fact that despite there being millions of artists and directors and songwriters out there who produce questionable content on a daily basis, each protected by the constitution of the United States, there are also an equal number of people out there who produce favorable content as well. What if the topics of religion and family offends the aforementioned category of content producers? Do we hear them trying to censor any references to good family values on television?
I think the reason we fear the media is the fact that maybe it can be compared to a mirror-- that what we see in the media is simply a reflection of how we are as a society. It’s possible to assume that if the content we see in movies and television is becoming shadier by the day, it is because we, as a people, are following that same trend. We live in a different world than in the 1950s, when every television program painted a perfectly ideal and positive view of society.
The morally uncorrupt and religious cherish the media as a way to disperse its positive messages to the world. They never worry about whether or not their messages may be offensive to some, yet are always quick to criticize the array of messages being broadcast through the airwaves that they dislike. If we want fairness, we have to first give it, realizing that the diverseness and variety found in today’s media is a permanent element of our society, unalterable. It’s a beautiful thing, for it allows everyone to share their points of view and express themselves in the way they consider to be correct.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Lost is Evil
This is a little essay I wrote last week about a recent ordeal in my life involving everyone's favorite TV show about lots of angry, stranded people. Try not to judge me for my weaknesses.
As I learn more and more about the media and its effects on our society, I’ve begun to realize the impact it’s had on my life and the lives of basically everyone I know. The media is pervasive and completely unavoidable unless you decide to be a hermit for your entire life. I think in my generation the act of watching television has become epidemic, and I would be a liar if I denied being affected by it in some way. However, despite television being a part of my life, I generally used to watch it only to distract myself when bored or update myself on what’s been going on in the world. Entertainment that’s drawn from watching television programs has never interested me all that much, given the fact that the high quality entertainment offered by cinema just makes anything broadcast on television look comparatively low-brow.
That was back in day, though, when television programs didn’t receive the attention or the funding it receives today. With more and more money being put into television programs, I’m finding that the quality of these programs is increasing exponentially. Some programs used to be laughably bad, yet nowadays, more often than not, television programs are very reminiscent of the high-budget blockbusters that we see in movie theaters around the globe.
I had the fortune (or misfortune) of becoming friends with a particular neighbor who happened to be in possession of three seasons of a hit program called lost. Before my mission, I had gotten word that ony of my best friends had gotten quite hooked to the program after he began watching it from season one. I thought this strange, and, if you knew my friend, you’d understand why. He’s never been the type of guy to get hooked onto anything involving the media, much less a television show. So, I was even more surprised to find out that during my tenure as a missionary, which ended up being seasons 2 and 3 of Lost, he remained a faithful viewer, eventually buying all three seasons on DVD, like my neighbor here at BYU-I.
So, curious as I was, I decided to take a risk and try watching season one. What fascinated me about the show was the top-notch quality in which it was made, ranging from the directing and writing, to the amazing performances by each and every one of the actors and the excellent musical score. Everything about the show has “Hollywood” written all over it. Even the producer, J.J. Abrams, has his hand in Hollywood, producing and directing many blockbuster films, the latest of which, Cloverfield, is in the theaters right now.
But what impressed me the most about Lost, besides being remarkably entertaining in every respect, was the way in which every episode was crafted and designed to hook the viewer and make him want to see more. The story seems to have been carefully calculated to addict the viewer. And the more you watch, the more the show takes over your life. You find yourself dreaming about Lost and thinking about Lost constantly. You feel attached to each one of the characters as if they were all your best buddies. The music gets into your head, and worst of all, you find it difficult to concentrate on anything. You find that all of your desires have become focused on one thing: knowing what will happen next in Lost. For the space of two weeks I felt utterly worthless as I poured through episode after episode of the twenty-four episode season. My mind was always in another place, speculating about the mysteries of the island where the show takes place, and the complex back stories of each of the many eccentric and interesting characters. One might say that my attitude and very way of life changed to that of a poor college kid hopelessly in love. I was in love, but with something that lacked flesh and bones and a legitimate soul. I was addicted to Lost. And, when I finished watching season one, the temptation to head right back downstairs in order to retrieve season two from my neighbor was very powerful. However, my academic side prevailed, and I decided I would not watch Lost for at least two weeks. I would observe how I reacted and how I would cope with the absence of something that had suddenly become, in my mind, a necessary part of my life.
The first few days were by far the most difficult. For something that had really dominated my every waking hour for the last while, it became difficult to find motivation to do anything. When I was consistently watching the program all the time, I actually found it easy to do my studies, though one may wonder why. I think Lost had sort of become something I would subconsciously reward myself with if I successfully completed my studies. Whenever I studied, I would think to myself, “just finish this paper and you’ll be able to watch Lost all afternoon.” This was something that quite obviously motivated me to get my studies done fast and sometimes efficiently.
However, without Lost it became difficult to think of a way to reward myself after finishing my homework. Without a reward, I just couldn’t summon the proper motivation I needed in order to get my homework done. It became more of a chore than ever before. I tried doing other things, like playing video games or reading, but I just couldn’t get the characters and mysteries of Lost out of my mind. What also didn’t help was the fact that season one ends with a major, and I mean major, cliffhanger. It’s almost as if some divine force knew what I was planning on doing for my project and wanted to make it as hard for me to accomplish as possible. It worked.
I made it through the first few days however, and I moved on to the second stage, which was perhaps the best and easiest. This was the phase in which my motivation to do things began to return, and I found that I didn’t need Lost to motivate me all that much, that doing homework for the sake of getting good grades was good enough for me. Besides, I began to enjoy studying again, although I still strongly missed the TV show. Bit by bit I also began to realize that the amount of time I spent watching that show was a great detriment to me, my grades, and my social life. Suddenly, I got excited as I thought of all the possibilities with regards to how I could best utilize all of the rediscovered free time. I spent more time studying in order to perfect class assignments beyond what was necessary, or study extra hard for a test even when I was already comfortable with the material. I even (*gasp*) got a girlfriend somehow. That’s something that would never have happened during my Lost phase, seeing as how each and every evening was spent in front of the tube.
The last phase comprised the last three or four days of my two week hiatus from Lost. This is when the initial excitement of suddenly having more time to do thing started wearing off, and I started to miss the show again. This was interesting because I began to miss elements of the show just like I had a week previously. I began to feel almost nostalgic when I talked to my friend about certain characters I had grown fond with, like Jack, Katie, Hurly…
Suddenly, I began to strategize and think of ways in which I could get my “fix” and still have time and motivation to lead a productive and balanced life. So here I am today, about to start watching season two of Lost, this time with the firm resolve not to fall into the trap and become addicted by this, the most diabolical form of media.
As I learn more and more about the media and its effects on our society, I’ve begun to realize the impact it’s had on my life and the lives of basically everyone I know. The media is pervasive and completely unavoidable unless you decide to be a hermit for your entire life. I think in my generation the act of watching television has become epidemic, and I would be a liar if I denied being affected by it in some way. However, despite television being a part of my life, I generally used to watch it only to distract myself when bored or update myself on what’s been going on in the world. Entertainment that’s drawn from watching television programs has never interested me all that much, given the fact that the high quality entertainment offered by cinema just makes anything broadcast on television look comparatively low-brow.
That was back in day, though, when television programs didn’t receive the attention or the funding it receives today. With more and more money being put into television programs, I’m finding that the quality of these programs is increasing exponentially. Some programs used to be laughably bad, yet nowadays, more often than not, television programs are very reminiscent of the high-budget blockbusters that we see in movie theaters around the globe.
I had the fortune (or misfortune) of becoming friends with a particular neighbor who happened to be in possession of three seasons of a hit program called lost. Before my mission, I had gotten word that ony of my best friends had gotten quite hooked to the program after he began watching it from season one. I thought this strange, and, if you knew my friend, you’d understand why. He’s never been the type of guy to get hooked onto anything involving the media, much less a television show. So, I was even more surprised to find out that during my tenure as a missionary, which ended up being seasons 2 and 3 of Lost, he remained a faithful viewer, eventually buying all three seasons on DVD, like my neighbor here at BYU-I.
So, curious as I was, I decided to take a risk and try watching season one. What fascinated me about the show was the top-notch quality in which it was made, ranging from the directing and writing, to the amazing performances by each and every one of the actors and the excellent musical score. Everything about the show has “Hollywood” written all over it. Even the producer, J.J. Abrams, has his hand in Hollywood, producing and directing many blockbuster films, the latest of which, Cloverfield, is in the theaters right now.
But what impressed me the most about Lost, besides being remarkably entertaining in every respect, was the way in which every episode was crafted and designed to hook the viewer and make him want to see more. The story seems to have been carefully calculated to addict the viewer. And the more you watch, the more the show takes over your life. You find yourself dreaming about Lost and thinking about Lost constantly. You feel attached to each one of the characters as if they were all your best buddies. The music gets into your head, and worst of all, you find it difficult to concentrate on anything. You find that all of your desires have become focused on one thing: knowing what will happen next in Lost. For the space of two weeks I felt utterly worthless as I poured through episode after episode of the twenty-four episode season. My mind was always in another place, speculating about the mysteries of the island where the show takes place, and the complex back stories of each of the many eccentric and interesting characters. One might say that my attitude and very way of life changed to that of a poor college kid hopelessly in love. I was in love, but with something that lacked flesh and bones and a legitimate soul. I was addicted to Lost. And, when I finished watching season one, the temptation to head right back downstairs in order to retrieve season two from my neighbor was very powerful. However, my academic side prevailed, and I decided I would not watch Lost for at least two weeks. I would observe how I reacted and how I would cope with the absence of something that had suddenly become, in my mind, a necessary part of my life.
The first few days were by far the most difficult. For something that had really dominated my every waking hour for the last while, it became difficult to find motivation to do anything. When I was consistently watching the program all the time, I actually found it easy to do my studies, though one may wonder why. I think Lost had sort of become something I would subconsciously reward myself with if I successfully completed my studies. Whenever I studied, I would think to myself, “just finish this paper and you’ll be able to watch Lost all afternoon.” This was something that quite obviously motivated me to get my studies done fast and sometimes efficiently.
However, without Lost it became difficult to think of a way to reward myself after finishing my homework. Without a reward, I just couldn’t summon the proper motivation I needed in order to get my homework done. It became more of a chore than ever before. I tried doing other things, like playing video games or reading, but I just couldn’t get the characters and mysteries of Lost out of my mind. What also didn’t help was the fact that season one ends with a major, and I mean major, cliffhanger. It’s almost as if some divine force knew what I was planning on doing for my project and wanted to make it as hard for me to accomplish as possible. It worked.
I made it through the first few days however, and I moved on to the second stage, which was perhaps the best and easiest. This was the phase in which my motivation to do things began to return, and I found that I didn’t need Lost to motivate me all that much, that doing homework for the sake of getting good grades was good enough for me. Besides, I began to enjoy studying again, although I still strongly missed the TV show. Bit by bit I also began to realize that the amount of time I spent watching that show was a great detriment to me, my grades, and my social life. Suddenly, I got excited as I thought of all the possibilities with regards to how I could best utilize all of the rediscovered free time. I spent more time studying in order to perfect class assignments beyond what was necessary, or study extra hard for a test even when I was already comfortable with the material. I even (*gasp*) got a girlfriend somehow. That’s something that would never have happened during my Lost phase, seeing as how each and every evening was spent in front of the tube.
The last phase comprised the last three or four days of my two week hiatus from Lost. This is when the initial excitement of suddenly having more time to do thing started wearing off, and I started to miss the show again. This was interesting because I began to miss elements of the show just like I had a week previously. I began to feel almost nostalgic when I talked to my friend about certain characters I had grown fond with, like Jack, Katie, Hurly…
Suddenly, I began to strategize and think of ways in which I could get my “fix” and still have time and motivation to lead a productive and balanced life. So here I am today, about to start watching season two of Lost, this time with the firm resolve not to fall into the trap and become addicted by this, the most diabolical form of media.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
An Attention Binge
This was a speculative essay I recently wrote about a new trend in today's media most of us, if not all of us, are familiar with. It's not meant to be exaustive in regards to providing all of the possible explanations for the trend. It's just meant for infotainment mostly.
Let’s say we’re all studying at an LDS university somewhere in the middle of our lengthy academic careers. We’re living near or on campus around thousands of other people our age within walking distance of our house or apartment. Everyone, whether they want to admit it or not, craves some sort of social interaction or at least a bit of attention now and again. For the normal human being, a college campus is the glorious fulfillment of that need and desire. Setting all hypothetical scenarios aside, we are indeed on a university campus with limitless opportunities in which to help us grow and spread out socially, making friends and, if we get lucky, find that special someone.
One way in which we achieve this level of social bliss comes directly from the fact that this university and the way it’s set up seem to encourage sociality greatly. We’re all separated into wards and encouraged to meet and interact with as many of our ward members as possible. Various callings we receive sometimes force that upon us. We’re further separated into FHE groups, creating an even more intimate setting which assists us even further in developing close friendships with our roommates and other apartments full of students of the opposite sex. Someone high up doesn’t seem content to just let us all be friends, it seems. The classes at BYU-Idaho are small and intimate, allowing for plenty of personal communication between students, while professors seem to purposefully assign a lot of group projects in order to further enhance our friendship creation.
With so many opportunities to meet people and expand our horizons, I find it difficult to believe that electronic assistance in socializing, other than the use of a cell phone, is necessary. I refer to the relatively new website, Facebook, which claims to be a social tool but ends up becoming the social life of many a student. Facebook has become a pervasive part of our society, especially among college-age U.S. citizens. Why, I ask, has it become this way? Especially, I add, since dialing a number on a cell phone is far easier and more convenient, and physically visiting someone is far more personal and appealing.
Whenever I used to meet someone and wanted to spend some time with him or her, I’d ask that person for their number. This was the “traditional method,” if you will, which was further streamlined with the use of the cell phone by being able to input the number directly into your digital phone book. It made number swapping nice and fast. And up until about 2005, it was also the norm. However, I was out of touch with society for two years while I served a mission in Mexico, during which a lot of our technology changed, and a great number of trends were introduced. Facebook officially launched on February 4, 2004, after which it quickly became such a widespread phenomenon that now over 60 million people have an active account (“Facebook”). It’s also ranked by Alexa Internet, Inc., an internet media research company, as the seventh most trafficked website in the world, just behind such juggernauts as Yahoo.com and Youtube.com (“Alexa”). Now, when I need to obtain the contact information of someone, they simply respond, “don’t worry about it, look me up on Facebook,” as if to say, “giving you my number isn’t worth the minuscule amount of effort it would take for me to speak ten numbers aloud.”
The American psychologist, Abraham Maslow, developed in 1954 a concept called the Hierarchy of Needs. This hierarchy sheds some light on a person’s priorities in life and how it relates to virtually everything he or she does. In order for someone to put some effort into doing something there must always be a reason. In one way or another, the person doing the action believes he or she will be benefited in some way. No one does something for nothing. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs teaches us a bit about why people do the things they do, especially when at first glance it appears rather ridiculous and absurd. This may help us understand why the Facebook addiction is sweeping the world.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is set up as follows:
1. Physiological Needs
These include everyone’s need to sleep, get exercise, bodily needs, as well as food and water. Before a person’s priorities move onto the next level in the Hierarchy of Needs, the previous needs must be fulfilled.
2. Safety Needs
These include a feeling of being secure and protected. Also included in this category is a feeling of peace and comfort, and orderly surroundings.
3. Love Needs
Now, this is interesting, don’t you think? After one has achieved the absolute basics of human life—physiological needs and safety needs—the next things he or she turns to is social acceptance and the love of others. Getting out of our apartments every once and a while is far more important than it sometimes seems. If it ranks just below feeling safe and secure, than it must rank far above countless activities we partake in every day that seem to us, at the moment, as some of the most important things in our lives.
Facebook caters to this desire in the extreme. When one uses Facebook, it’s not like picking up the phone and hearing someone’s voice then subsequently responding. The point of Facebook is to put your best face forward; expressing yourself in a manner that you feel best pleases those who visit your profile. You choose to customize your profile with those things you feel will best represent you to others and make them believe that you’re an interesting person. You choose to upload only the photos that make you look skinnier, more muscular, and, ultimately, more appealing. If you have the technology, you may even doctor the photos just a bit in an attempt to further alter your self-image. Your Facebook profile, in an almost subconscious manner, becomes a reflection of yourself, acting as an ego-booster and confidence steroid. You catch yourself staring at your own profile as much as those of your friends.
Another reason for the Facebook addiction is that most people, if they’re brave enough to admit it, often feel anxious when placed in social situations. This doesn’t always happen, of course, but there are times when a guy wants to talk to a certain girl yet can’t seem to go through with it. He’s simply scared that he’ll say something or do something that won’t make him look like the coolest guy in town. Talking to someone face to face is a process that doesn’t allow for a lot of pre-meditation. It’s almost always spontaneous and keeps us on our toes. Facebook allows you to socialize, albeit on a much more shallow level, but with plenty of time to think about the various consequences of each communication you make. A guiding principle of communication is that you can’t not communicate. Even if you’re not actively writing messages to the people you know, you’re always communicating in one way or another, and Facebook let’s you know exactly what it is that you’re communicating.
It is the opinion of this author that in the absence of proper communications, people are becoming less social and more obsessed with ways in which they can fulfill #3 in the Hierarchy of Needs without having to leave their comfort zone. Heck, there are those that don’t even come near the edge of their comfort zone, feeling content with removing themselves with any or all direct communications with those that surround them. Granted, these people aren’t all that common, but if they exist now, there will be more and more of these people in the future as the technology permitting them to live in this manner continues to improve.
Facebook is, by no means, a bad thing. But I think that, as with almost everything, it can be abused and changed from its intended purpose into something debilitating. Facebook was designed to be a “social tool,” and I hope that it can always remain just that—a “tool.” It becomes something far more diabolical when it becomes the center of our social lives.
Works Cited:
“Facebook.” Wikipedia 6 Mar. 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook
Alexa.com 6 Mar. 2008
Let’s say we’re all studying at an LDS university somewhere in the middle of our lengthy academic careers. We’re living near or on campus around thousands of other people our age within walking distance of our house or apartment. Everyone, whether they want to admit it or not, craves some sort of social interaction or at least a bit of attention now and again. For the normal human being, a college campus is the glorious fulfillment of that need and desire. Setting all hypothetical scenarios aside, we are indeed on a university campus with limitless opportunities in which to help us grow and spread out socially, making friends and, if we get lucky, find that special someone.
One way in which we achieve this level of social bliss comes directly from the fact that this university and the way it’s set up seem to encourage sociality greatly. We’re all separated into wards and encouraged to meet and interact with as many of our ward members as possible. Various callings we receive sometimes force that upon us. We’re further separated into FHE groups, creating an even more intimate setting which assists us even further in developing close friendships with our roommates and other apartments full of students of the opposite sex. Someone high up doesn’t seem content to just let us all be friends, it seems. The classes at BYU-Idaho are small and intimate, allowing for plenty of personal communication between students, while professors seem to purposefully assign a lot of group projects in order to further enhance our friendship creation.
With so many opportunities to meet people and expand our horizons, I find it difficult to believe that electronic assistance in socializing, other than the use of a cell phone, is necessary. I refer to the relatively new website, Facebook, which claims to be a social tool but ends up becoming the social life of many a student. Facebook has become a pervasive part of our society, especially among college-age U.S. citizens. Why, I ask, has it become this way? Especially, I add, since dialing a number on a cell phone is far easier and more convenient, and physically visiting someone is far more personal and appealing.
Whenever I used to meet someone and wanted to spend some time with him or her, I’d ask that person for their number. This was the “traditional method,” if you will, which was further streamlined with the use of the cell phone by being able to input the number directly into your digital phone book. It made number swapping nice and fast. And up until about 2005, it was also the norm. However, I was out of touch with society for two years while I served a mission in Mexico, during which a lot of our technology changed, and a great number of trends were introduced. Facebook officially launched on February 4, 2004, after which it quickly became such a widespread phenomenon that now over 60 million people have an active account (“Facebook”). It’s also ranked by Alexa Internet, Inc., an internet media research company, as the seventh most trafficked website in the world, just behind such juggernauts as Yahoo.com and Youtube.com (“Alexa”). Now, when I need to obtain the contact information of someone, they simply respond, “don’t worry about it, look me up on Facebook,” as if to say, “giving you my number isn’t worth the minuscule amount of effort it would take for me to speak ten numbers aloud.”
The American psychologist, Abraham Maslow, developed in 1954 a concept called the Hierarchy of Needs. This hierarchy sheds some light on a person’s priorities in life and how it relates to virtually everything he or she does. In order for someone to put some effort into doing something there must always be a reason. In one way or another, the person doing the action believes he or she will be benefited in some way. No one does something for nothing. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs teaches us a bit about why people do the things they do, especially when at first glance it appears rather ridiculous and absurd. This may help us understand why the Facebook addiction is sweeping the world.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is set up as follows:
1. Physiological Needs
These include everyone’s need to sleep, get exercise, bodily needs, as well as food and water. Before a person’s priorities move onto the next level in the Hierarchy of Needs, the previous needs must be fulfilled.
2. Safety Needs
These include a feeling of being secure and protected. Also included in this category is a feeling of peace and comfort, and orderly surroundings.
3. Love Needs
Now, this is interesting, don’t you think? After one has achieved the absolute basics of human life—physiological needs and safety needs—the next things he or she turns to is social acceptance and the love of others. Getting out of our apartments every once and a while is far more important than it sometimes seems. If it ranks just below feeling safe and secure, than it must rank far above countless activities we partake in every day that seem to us, at the moment, as some of the most important things in our lives.
Facebook caters to this desire in the extreme. When one uses Facebook, it’s not like picking up the phone and hearing someone’s voice then subsequently responding. The point of Facebook is to put your best face forward; expressing yourself in a manner that you feel best pleases those who visit your profile. You choose to customize your profile with those things you feel will best represent you to others and make them believe that you’re an interesting person. You choose to upload only the photos that make you look skinnier, more muscular, and, ultimately, more appealing. If you have the technology, you may even doctor the photos just a bit in an attempt to further alter your self-image. Your Facebook profile, in an almost subconscious manner, becomes a reflection of yourself, acting as an ego-booster and confidence steroid. You catch yourself staring at your own profile as much as those of your friends.
Another reason for the Facebook addiction is that most people, if they’re brave enough to admit it, often feel anxious when placed in social situations. This doesn’t always happen, of course, but there are times when a guy wants to talk to a certain girl yet can’t seem to go through with it. He’s simply scared that he’ll say something or do something that won’t make him look like the coolest guy in town. Talking to someone face to face is a process that doesn’t allow for a lot of pre-meditation. It’s almost always spontaneous and keeps us on our toes. Facebook allows you to socialize, albeit on a much more shallow level, but with plenty of time to think about the various consequences of each communication you make. A guiding principle of communication is that you can’t not communicate. Even if you’re not actively writing messages to the people you know, you’re always communicating in one way or another, and Facebook let’s you know exactly what it is that you’re communicating.
It is the opinion of this author that in the absence of proper communications, people are becoming less social and more obsessed with ways in which they can fulfill #3 in the Hierarchy of Needs without having to leave their comfort zone. Heck, there are those that don’t even come near the edge of their comfort zone, feeling content with removing themselves with any or all direct communications with those that surround them. Granted, these people aren’t all that common, but if they exist now, there will be more and more of these people in the future as the technology permitting them to live in this manner continues to improve.
Facebook is, by no means, a bad thing. But I think that, as with almost everything, it can be abused and changed from its intended purpose into something debilitating. Facebook was designed to be a “social tool,” and I hope that it can always remain just that—a “tool.” It becomes something far more diabolical when it becomes the center of our social lives.
Works Cited:
“Facebook.” Wikipedia 6 Mar. 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook
Alexa.com 6 Mar. 2008
Monday, March 3, 2008
To my dedicated fans...
This is Jessica and she's way too good for me
It's been pretty must an eternity since I've last added to my blog, and my goal is to improve in my consistency. I've been up at BYU-I for almost two months now, though it's felt like I've lived a lifetime of goodness. At the moment I'm just rollin' with things, trying to stay ahead in my classes and stay out of too much trouble. Women have kind of gotten thrown into the mix, resulting in more reasons to skip classes and procrastinate important assignments. But I'm hanging in there, despite all the odds which are heavily stacked against me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
