gift registry- cards a no no, invitations all electronic- evite
coffee? no, busy, just email me a copy
A new aspect of technology has been brought to my attention lately, and I have to say, it is becoming a personal pet peeve. How technology is interfering with my girl time these days is annoying, and the new ways to plan a GNO are getting to be way more complicated than it should be. Trying to plan a girls night out consists of every form of technology we have these days. You text to find a date that works, then call to see a time that's best, then email a reminder for the flaky friends. It gets exhausting! I miss the days where we just called each other and set a date and time, and everyone would show up because we all wrote it down in our day timers. Those days are long gone.
I am starting to plan my baby shower, and invitations are my next thing on my list. I have all of my friends phone numbers, I have the majority of my friends email addresses, but I was surprised by how few recent home addresses I have for my friends. My mother and I were sitting down with my best friend who is helping with he shower, and we were talking about the best way to get the addresses. My friend mentioned that the email addresses we don't have we can most likely find on Facebook, so why don't we just look there and send out Evites instead. My mother had no idea what she was talking about.
It took us a few minutes to explain the Evite system, and we tried to pump it up as much as possible focusing on the convenience factors, and how you can RSVP right online and how the responses get sent directly back to you- but no chance. My mother thought that an email for an invitation was completely inappropriate and that the member of our family would not only think it was a tacky gesture, but that the majority of them would be flat out offended by it.
I have to stop and assume that the difference in opinion is strictly generational, and has a lot to do with the fact that my mother does not even have an email account. She does not get the convenience, because she has never experienced it. My mother's friends are the type of gals who send elaborate invitations to every event- form a Superbowl party to a BBQ, you get a 3D invite in the mail, addressed in calligraphy. The idea to send an electronic invitation was way beyond her realm of thinking.
A baby shower is up there with a wedding in my opinion, as far as invitations go. I have received Evites for informal events, such a s BBQ's or sorority alumni events, but never for a wedding or baby shower-- yet.
Apparently the up and coming trend is Wedding Evites. Ashlee Simpson was the first to attempt the fad, and things did not go well in Hollywood. Critics called her "Trashlee Simpson" and claimed that her Alice in Wonderland theme was completely turned tacky thanks to her email invitation attempt. Had she sent "real" invitations with elaborate ribbon or paper, the event would have been perceived differently.
As with text messages, a message can get lost in translation or be taken completely different than meant. Evites are the same way. The wrong impression can be given by the wrong invitation, and Evites have been labeled as improper for formal affairs and impersonal for intimate events.
Another problem with Evites is receiving them. It is hard to miss a huge, odd shaped envelope mixed in with bank statements in your mail, but to skip over an email that claims, "You're invited!" can be easy to do. In this day and age, we all have so many accounts that we do our business with, how do we know at the end of the day who we have given what address to? There are very few accounts of my own that I check regularly, and I have to admit, I have missed a few last minute BBQ's because of it.
So this is where the etiquette question comes in. What is considered an appropriate affair to send an Evite for? And if you do send an Evite, what is the method of contact for those who do not have an email address? For example, with my baby shower, if I do choose (which at this point is NOT an option) to send Evites out, then do I send regular invitations to my grandmother and older relatives that might not be as technologically savvy as my college aged friends? And as long as I am doing invitations, do I send them to the people I sent Evites to as well? Or do I sen Evites and call the others? I can't imagine calling a relative to invite them to my baby shower. Where is the line drawn between Evite Acceptable and Evite Inappropriate? And what order is technology in these days from formal to informal? Would we say formal invitation, telephone call, Evite, then text? What is appropriate for what? Does the age of the recipient matter? What about the location? Do we trust technology enough to deliver such an important message like a wedding or baby shower invitation?
It is said that there is something invaluable about having a tangible invitation, hand-written, and specifically addressed to you, that no other form of technology can replace. I agree with that. Anything handwritten these days is precious to me, and I try my hardest to hand write as many cards and letters as I can, but it is a challenge knowing how much faster a letter can be produced on a computer, and how much more quickly it can be delivered. Have our values changed concerning time and thought in a gift? Do we value getting a message to the recipient quicker, more than the thought behind the message being sent? What drives us to be "pressed for time" or rushed in sending anything at all?
Since I have taken this course and analyzed technology from an entirely different standpoint, I have realized how little I communicate face-to-face, and how much more I value time spent with someone as apposed to with their profile.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Celebrities and their Cell Phones
Although we are aware that our personal relationships are being affected by technology, do you ever stop to think if celebrities lives are affected as well? We always think of being interrupted by a text, or a reminder, but have the boundaries of technology and day to day life for celebrities changed as well? From Miley Cyrus to President Obama, priorities have changed.
One of the biggest changes that has been made in the White House with this Presidency is the fact that President Obama has managed to keep hold of his Blackberry device. There was much fuss made over the security measures that will have to be taken if President Obama insists on keeping his Blackberry, one security measure being an encryption software installed as to keep the "bad guys" out of private conversations. (LATimes.com)
President Obama has always been "virtually connected" to supporters, which has been made clear through his Facebook page, online fundraising, and YouTube videos. The thought of not being able to keep his Blacknberry which he has used to make all of these things assessable to him, would be hard to swallow. Imagine if someone told you that you could not use your phone anymore, and that it was being taken away from you for security measures- How would you react?
President Obama does get to keep his phone after much ado, and I have to admit that it is nice to know that our President knows how to use his Blackberry and relies on it as much as I rely on mine.
Miley Cyrus, being a typical teen with their phone attached to their hand, was caught texting during a live interview on the radio. Being a little caught off guard, the host asked, "Who are you texting?" which led into a terrible interview consisting of awkward silences. Isn't that crossing the line just a little bit? To me, texting while having a conversation is considered rude and flat out annoying, but while a celebrity is being interviewed? Give me a break.
I am studying to become a journalist, and I have no idea what I would do if I was interviewing Hannah Montana and she picked up her phone and started texting in the middle of it! I mean, I guess she can do whatever she wants being number 12 on the Holloywood's Top 20 Young, Famous, and Rich list, but don't they teach some sort of manners in the Disney family?
Along with well known celebrities increasing their phone time, designer Jason Wu, who is responsible for Michelle Obama's Inaugural Ball Gown (the gorgeous one-shoulder white one) said that he received hundreds of text messages in the following week with clients begging for designs. He said the night of the Ball, he had to turn off his phone because the ringing was too much to handle, and just take in the surprise that Michelle was wearing his dress on his own.
Who would have text the newest, hottest designer five years ago to ask for an appointment or a design? No one. Times have changed and so have relationships between celebrities and their phones, and celebrities and their fans.
Along with cell phones, celebrities have found a new found love for Twittering. Ashton Kutcher has made headlines by declaring that he will get more followers than CNN (which he did) and Shaq has daily followers that meet him random places he designates on his Twitter for free basketball tickets. Celebrities have found an easy, safe way to access their fans on a one-on-one level, without it being one-on-one.
Having a way to contact your favorite celebrity, whether it be by text or Twitter, makes a fan feel connected, which inevitably creates a sense of loyalty and comrodery. Twitter accounts are being used from college professors to Sean Puffy Combs, which shows the versatility of the site and the potential for outreach.
Along with relating to fans, celebrities have been introduced more and more to the power of product placement. No longer do celebrities have to talk to us on the TV screen and build a reputation so that we trust their opinion, all they have to do is hold a particular water bottle or telephone in a scene now and sales sky rocket.
The trend started in the early 2000, beginning to increase, where marketers shelled out 71% more — $941 million — to integrate brands into TV shows in 2005 vs. 2004 (PQ Media, USAToday.com).
The growing trend of product placement is everywhere from late night talk shows, to full feature films, from reality TV, to soap operas. And it doesn't stop there. A Finnish author, Steig Larsson, has received slashing on discussion boards for his product placements within his books. Readers complain about how every computer piece and mobile phone in all three books are described in detail, and how the brand is always mentioned. Why should this matter to the reader? What purpose does this information serve if not merely for product placement?
America's Next Top Model is, in my opinion, the worst product placement program. Everything they use, from make up to toilet paper, they fully endorse and use a catch phrase for. They incorporate activities solely for the purpose to advertise a specific product, and you feel like you are watching an hour long advertisement on the home shopping network, with a few dramatic scenes added for entertainment value.
I have worked as a spokes model for the majority of the past four years, and recently I have noticed the trend of product placement as well. Instead of product information about the bottled water or pricey watch company I was representing, I have been given the movies that the product made an appearance in and what actors are wearing it these days. For example, one of the main points I was supposed to get across to the Las Vegas Convention in 2008, was that a Tutima watch was used in the Robert Deniro and Al Pacino film, Righteous Kill. It was the watch that they use to time each other the whole movie. When I worked Sundance Film Festival this year, I was working for Icelandic Glacial bottled water. One of our main points to the public was the appearances the water has made on the TV series Scrubs and the future films that are considering it.
Does a celebrity opinion mean less to us now? Do we only need to see the product to want to buy it? Is there no trusting relationship built between client and spokes model anymore? Does this mean less endorsement deals in the future for celebrities? Only time will tell...
One of the biggest changes that has been made in the White House with this Presidency is the fact that President Obama has managed to keep hold of his Blackberry device. There was much fuss made over the security measures that will have to be taken if President Obama insists on keeping his Blackberry, one security measure being an encryption software installed as to keep the "bad guys" out of private conversations. (LATimes.com)
President Obama has always been "virtually connected" to supporters, which has been made clear through his Facebook page, online fundraising, and YouTube videos. The thought of not being able to keep his Blacknberry which he has used to make all of these things assessable to him, would be hard to swallow. Imagine if someone told you that you could not use your phone anymore, and that it was being taken away from you for security measures- How would you react?
President Obama does get to keep his phone after much ado, and I have to admit that it is nice to know that our President knows how to use his Blackberry and relies on it as much as I rely on mine.
Miley Cyrus, being a typical teen with their phone attached to their hand, was caught texting during a live interview on the radio. Being a little caught off guard, the host asked, "Who are you texting?" which led into a terrible interview consisting of awkward silences. Isn't that crossing the line just a little bit? To me, texting while having a conversation is considered rude and flat out annoying, but while a celebrity is being interviewed? Give me a break.
I am studying to become a journalist, and I have no idea what I would do if I was interviewing Hannah Montana and she picked up her phone and started texting in the middle of it! I mean, I guess she can do whatever she wants being number 12 on the Holloywood's Top 20 Young, Famous, and Rich list, but don't they teach some sort of manners in the Disney family?
Along with well known celebrities increasing their phone time, designer Jason Wu, who is responsible for Michelle Obama's Inaugural Ball Gown (the gorgeous one-shoulder white one) said that he received hundreds of text messages in the following week with clients begging for designs. He said the night of the Ball, he had to turn off his phone because the ringing was too much to handle, and just take in the surprise that Michelle was wearing his dress on his own.
Who would have text the newest, hottest designer five years ago to ask for an appointment or a design? No one. Times have changed and so have relationships between celebrities and their phones, and celebrities and their fans.
Along with cell phones, celebrities have found a new found love for Twittering. Ashton Kutcher has made headlines by declaring that he will get more followers than CNN (which he did) and Shaq has daily followers that meet him random places he designates on his Twitter for free basketball tickets. Celebrities have found an easy, safe way to access their fans on a one-on-one level, without it being one-on-one.
Having a way to contact your favorite celebrity, whether it be by text or Twitter, makes a fan feel connected, which inevitably creates a sense of loyalty and comrodery. Twitter accounts are being used from college professors to Sean Puffy Combs, which shows the versatility of the site and the potential for outreach.
Along with relating to fans, celebrities have been introduced more and more to the power of product placement. No longer do celebrities have to talk to us on the TV screen and build a reputation so that we trust their opinion, all they have to do is hold a particular water bottle or telephone in a scene now and sales sky rocket.
The trend started in the early 2000, beginning to increase, where marketers shelled out 71% more — $941 million — to integrate brands into TV shows in 2005 vs. 2004 (PQ Media, USAToday.com).
The growing trend of product placement is everywhere from late night talk shows, to full feature films, from reality TV, to soap operas. And it doesn't stop there. A Finnish author, Steig Larsson, has received slashing on discussion boards for his product placements within his books. Readers complain about how every computer piece and mobile phone in all three books are described in detail, and how the brand is always mentioned. Why should this matter to the reader? What purpose does this information serve if not merely for product placement?
America's Next Top Model is, in my opinion, the worst product placement program. Everything they use, from make up to toilet paper, they fully endorse and use a catch phrase for. They incorporate activities solely for the purpose to advertise a specific product, and you feel like you are watching an hour long advertisement on the home shopping network, with a few dramatic scenes added for entertainment value.
I have worked as a spokes model for the majority of the past four years, and recently I have noticed the trend of product placement as well. Instead of product information about the bottled water or pricey watch company I was representing, I have been given the movies that the product made an appearance in and what actors are wearing it these days. For example, one of the main points I was supposed to get across to the Las Vegas Convention in 2008, was that a Tutima watch was used in the Robert Deniro and Al Pacino film, Righteous Kill. It was the watch that they use to time each other the whole movie. When I worked Sundance Film Festival this year, I was working for Icelandic Glacial bottled water. One of our main points to the public was the appearances the water has made on the TV series Scrubs and the future films that are considering it.
Does a celebrity opinion mean less to us now? Do we only need to see the product to want to buy it? Is there no trusting relationship built between client and spokes model anymore? Does this mean less endorsement deals in the future for celebrities? Only time will tell...
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Myspace is Your Space
As I mentioned in my previous blog, I am a fan of my Facebook, but I also have a Myspace account that I never use. What is the difference between Myspace and Facebook? And why do the crowds vary so much as well as reputation?
Myspace was first criticized for the sex scandals and online meeting that had been arranged with teenage girls, but then got amazing praise for enabling and encouraging "prosumers" within the music industry.
In 2008, a study showed that there were 11.6 billion page views in October (up from 9-billion in September), displacing eBay as the fourth-busiest site on the net, with more page views than any Internet destination except Yahoo, AOL, and MSN. (Nowpublic.com)
Now, in 2009, Facebook has surpassed Myspace by having 10 million more visitors each month. Is it becasue of the origination of Facebook? Or is it because Myspace was the first networking site of its kind and had to take the fall for the mistakes others were making, giving it a negative connotation?
Myspace is more of a music website than Facebook, and Myspace created buzz early on that was so new, it was still controversial. The idea of Myspace posed threats, whereas, once the negative hype and problems were reported on, Facebook had a chance to do a networking site "the right way".
What is to be said for self inflicted fame, such as Tila Tequila, and starting as a nobody on a website?
Tila Nguyen, who is originally from Singapore, moved to Houston, Texas with her parents at age one. She began using drugs at age 11, and after getting kicked out of boarding school, dealing with gangs, and struggling to find herself, she ran away from home at age 16. After high school, she was discovered by a Playboy scout and became Playboys first Asian Girl of the Week in 2002. She has been involved in many different areas of Hollywood since her appearance in Playboy, but most people know her from her Myspace claim-to-fame, of being the Most Popular Person on Myspace in 2006. Her Mysapce fame then led to her own TV show on MTV, A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila.
Tila is just one example of many "nobodies" who are trying to become "somebodies" in the online world. Who would have thought that after all her attempts- Playboy, two bands that are now broken up that no one could tell you the name of, TV host of Pants-Off-Dance-Off, etc.- that it would be a Myspace page and the accepting of anyone who requested her, that would lead to stardom.
Along with creating fame, Myspace also endorses it. Celebrities have Myspace pages for fun or for publicity reasons, but Myspace has also been a muse for artists as well.
A few years ago, I was a back-up dancer for the after party for the Up In Smoke Tour featuring Snoop Dogg, Eminem, and Dr.Dre. I danced for an artist named Kidd Kazmeo, who now has a Myspace with all of his songs, one of which is named "The Myspace Song". The song has about 3,000 hits, and is all about the phenomenon of the Myspace world. Not only did Myspace help me relocate Kidd, since it has been quite a long time since we have seen each other, it also enabled me to listen to his new tracks and see where his music has taken him.
Although Myspace can allow people or fans to follow and track down artists, celebrities, or old friends, how authentic can we really say these "friends" are? Does Tila Tequila know one-third of her friends at all? Or is it just about registered members and user names? For example, I love Kendra from The Girls Next Door- I think she is a bad ass who would be awesome to have at a party. I am friends with her on Myspace, but why should that really matter?! I think it's cool, don't get me wrong, but shouldn't there be a different category for REAL friends? How can someone say they have over 3,000 friends online, when they only know, maybe 75-100 of them on a first name basis? Does this change the value of the word "friend"? Or is it just understood that the term "friend" is used more loosely online than in real life?
Critics are saying that Myspace is responsible for more teenage activity, whereas Facebook is responsible for college aged addictions. I have to admit, the majority of my friends have not checked their Mysapce accounts in months, but check their Facebook profile at least three times a day. It is also interesting in class, whenever laptops are up, there is occasional note taking, but the blue and white border gives the profile checking away every time. Why is it always Facebook I see in classes? Is it that our generation is literally outgrowing Myspace? Or is it just used for other mediums more now?
Maybe those of us who have just used Mysapce for social networking aren't really the sites main target group anyways. Myspaces allows so much more creativity and publicity opportunities than Facebook, and is said to be much more user friendly for the music minded users. There are more than eight million bands on Myspace now, and the number is only increasing.
Although Myspace will always have a place in our hearts as the first site to introduce us to social networking and the addiction that lies within, perhaps I should stop looking at the site as a "friend finder" and start admiring the site for the music world it has created. Maybe then I will find a new respect for the networking capabilities, and it will step out from second place, and be side by side with Facebook in a new category of it's own.
Myspace was first criticized for the sex scandals and online meeting that had been arranged with teenage girls, but then got amazing praise for enabling and encouraging "prosumers" within the music industry.
In 2008, a study showed that there were 11.6 billion page views in October (up from 9-billion in September), displacing eBay as the fourth-busiest site on the net, with more page views than any Internet destination except Yahoo, AOL, and MSN. (Nowpublic.com)
Now, in 2009, Facebook has surpassed Myspace by having 10 million more visitors each month. Is it becasue of the origination of Facebook? Or is it because Myspace was the first networking site of its kind and had to take the fall for the mistakes others were making, giving it a negative connotation?
Myspace is more of a music website than Facebook, and Myspace created buzz early on that was so new, it was still controversial. The idea of Myspace posed threats, whereas, once the negative hype and problems were reported on, Facebook had a chance to do a networking site "the right way".
What is to be said for self inflicted fame, such as Tila Tequila, and starting as a nobody on a website?
Tila Nguyen, who is originally from Singapore, moved to Houston, Texas with her parents at age one. She began using drugs at age 11, and after getting kicked out of boarding school, dealing with gangs, and struggling to find herself, she ran away from home at age 16. After high school, she was discovered by a Playboy scout and became Playboys first Asian Girl of the Week in 2002. She has been involved in many different areas of Hollywood since her appearance in Playboy, but most people know her from her Myspace claim-to-fame, of being the Most Popular Person on Myspace in 2006. Her Mysapce fame then led to her own TV show on MTV, A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila.
Tila is just one example of many "nobodies" who are trying to become "somebodies" in the online world. Who would have thought that after all her attempts- Playboy, two bands that are now broken up that no one could tell you the name of, TV host of Pants-Off-Dance-Off, etc.- that it would be a Myspace page and the accepting of anyone who requested her, that would lead to stardom.
Along with creating fame, Myspace also endorses it. Celebrities have Myspace pages for fun or for publicity reasons, but Myspace has also been a muse for artists as well.
A few years ago, I was a back-up dancer for the after party for the Up In Smoke Tour featuring Snoop Dogg, Eminem, and Dr.Dre. I danced for an artist named Kidd Kazmeo, who now has a Myspace with all of his songs, one of which is named "The Myspace Song". The song has about 3,000 hits, and is all about the phenomenon of the Myspace world. Not only did Myspace help me relocate Kidd, since it has been quite a long time since we have seen each other, it also enabled me to listen to his new tracks and see where his music has taken him.
Although Myspace can allow people or fans to follow and track down artists, celebrities, or old friends, how authentic can we really say these "friends" are? Does Tila Tequila know one-third of her friends at all? Or is it just about registered members and user names? For example, I love Kendra from The Girls Next Door- I think she is a bad ass who would be awesome to have at a party. I am friends with her on Myspace, but why should that really matter?! I think it's cool, don't get me wrong, but shouldn't there be a different category for REAL friends? How can someone say they have over 3,000 friends online, when they only know, maybe 75-100 of them on a first name basis? Does this change the value of the word "friend"? Or is it just understood that the term "friend" is used more loosely online than in real life?
Critics are saying that Myspace is responsible for more teenage activity, whereas Facebook is responsible for college aged addictions. I have to admit, the majority of my friends have not checked their Mysapce accounts in months, but check their Facebook profile at least three times a day. It is also interesting in class, whenever laptops are up, there is occasional note taking, but the blue and white border gives the profile checking away every time. Why is it always Facebook I see in classes? Is it that our generation is literally outgrowing Myspace? Or is it just used for other mediums more now?
Maybe those of us who have just used Mysapce for social networking aren't really the sites main target group anyways. Myspaces allows so much more creativity and publicity opportunities than Facebook, and is said to be much more user friendly for the music minded users. There are more than eight million bands on Myspace now, and the number is only increasing.
Although Myspace will always have a place in our hearts as the first site to introduce us to social networking and the addiction that lies within, perhaps I should stop looking at the site as a "friend finder" and start admiring the site for the music world it has created. Maybe then I will find a new respect for the networking capabilities, and it will step out from second place, and be side by side with Facebook in a new category of it's own.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Facebook Frenzy
We have all heard of the infamous Facebook, most of us are on it, and the rest of you are thinking about joining. Facebook is a place to chat, share pictures, and to poke people as much as you like. Although it has a great intention of making our world seem a little less divided and a whole lot more united, there are many consequences to having a Facebook account that I did not realize before this class. I paid no attention to what pictures me and my friends were uploading, never thinking about the possibility that they may be virtually linked to your name forever. I never gave a second thought to the information, quotes, or interests that I listed, and never thought they might possibly lead to me not getting hired for a job I interviewed for. But those kind of things are happening more and more these days.
Not only are jobs not being given to those with "questionable online identities", but jobs and titles are actually being taken away. Miss New Jersey was actually blackmailed over pictures that were on her very own Facebook page. Her title was revoked after she was allegedly "partying it up" with her boyfriend and friends at the bar. Michael Phelps is another example of how pictures someone else posts on the Internet can come back to haunt you. Because of his pics with him smoking pot, he lost all endorsements from Kellogg's and a huge paycheck. So where is the line drawn between private and public? And why is this new phenomenon encouraging our youth to be such extroverts with information and private details?
Logging in to Facebook these days is almost too overwhelming for me. I have many friends that like to give up-to-the-minute information about their day to day lives. They can simply log on and tell their whole world what they are doing as often as they like.
Katie is... eating at The Dodo!
An hour later, Katie is... Done eating at The Dodo! Onto the mall!
An hour later, Katie is... Tired of the mall! Heading home to make spaghetti!
An hour later, Katie is... Full of yummy spaghetti! Yum Yum!! Time for a movie!
Two hours later, Katie is... Loving Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist!!
And so on.....
Why do we feel the need to update our status during each activity of our day? Why do you want people to know exactly what you are doing and where you are at all times?!
Not only can updates be annoying, but can they also be dangerous? There have been many cases of violence associated to Facebook and status updates in the last five years.
One headline reads, "Husband hacked wife to death with meat cleaver after she changed Facebook status to single". A man actually murdered his wife because of the "embarrassment her status changed caused him". In another story, a man who had seen his wife's profile status changed to "Splitting up with Husband" came home and brutally murdered the mother of their two girls, and then drilled holes in his arms and legs with a power tool in a nearby park where he later died of shock. How serious should we be taking these status changes? Should we really be announcing divorces, deaths in the family, and other serious issues on a website originally created for college students to keep in touch? As I wrote about in my first blog, Phonebook or Facebook, I was stunned to hear about my cousin's death over a Facebook instant message, but I am not alone. There are many cases of deaths being announced online, and declaring the "single" status after a divorce is proving to be an upcoming trend.
Along with announcing divorces, posting an "in a relationship" status is a must for dating these days. After hearing about a friend dating someone, I have caught myself asking, "Is it Facebook official?" By putting who you are in a relationship with on Facebook, it has a more "official" standing, it is like the last step in deciding you are exclusive. Announcing to your 1,ooo "friends" that you care enough about this person to post that you are dating says something, but is it saying too much?
When I got divorced, all of my close friends knew it was coming for months, so it was no surprise when it actually happened. I consider myself a pretty private person, and I do not like other to know too much about my personal life and my relationships within it. But when all was said and done, no one else caught on when I had moved thousands of miles away from the dreaded ex to live on an island, it was the Facebook status change to "single" that made the masses realize it was over. Go figure.
Not only is it a tad humiliating to go through a break-up, it feels like social suicide to have to announce it online. But if you don't change your status, people wonder why, and then you look like a desperate cling-on if he has already changed his status, so really, it is a necessity whether you like it or not. There is pressure to keep your profile updated and in sync with the rate of gossip and chit chat. I was dating my boyfriend for about five months before we even thought to change our status, and as soon as we did, we got comments form all sorts of people claiming, "It's about time!" or "Yay! Finally!!" like we had taken a further step in our relationship or something! Like Facebook acknowledgement is the mid-point between dating and engagement.
Another pressure that we are all faced with is who to put in our Top Ten. Do we put boyfriend over girlfriends, new friends higher than old friends? The pressure to get the right ranking is exhausting and feels impossible at times! There is never a time when everyone is satisfied. But why should I have to rank my friends anyway? Don't they know how much I value our friendship by the amount of time we spend together? Apparently not.
There are many reasons to have a Facebook account, and don't get me wrong, I adore mine, but there continue to be many new reasons not to.
Not only does this site have more than 200 million users, the average user has 120 friends, and more than 3.5 billion minutes are spent on the site daily.(Facebook.com)
What happened to strolls in the park and shopping at the mall with friends? How much has Facebook affected our daily lives as teens, college students, and Americans as a whole?
There are many entrepreneurs that have started a Facebook page for their companies, many artists who display pictures or music for easy viewing, and many viewers that would rather stay indoors on their computers, in the comfort of their own homes, instead of wandering malls, visiting galleries, or going to concerts. There are more than 660,000 developers and entrepreneurs from more than 180 countries on Facebook now. (Facebook.com)
Is this bad for our generation and the small businesses of America? Is it smarter to start an online company now instead renting a space in a mall? What is to be said about advancements in online purchases and the digital divide? How could our parents or grandparents go shopping if most brands move exclusively online?
Facebook does create a way for us to keep in touch with one another, but it has also begun to pose a threat on our private lives and identity. It has created a place for us to write our minds and label ourselves, but has also given the opportunity for others to label us. Although it seems like a harmless networking site, Facebook is creating many challenges we as a generation are going to have to adapt to and learn from. The Facebook Frenzy will continue for years to come, I am sure, but will it inevitably be the destruction of our face-to-face time, and will it change the authenticity of the word "friend" for good?
Not only are jobs not being given to those with "questionable online identities", but jobs and titles are actually being taken away. Miss New Jersey was actually blackmailed over pictures that were on her very own Facebook page. Her title was revoked after she was allegedly "partying it up" with her boyfriend and friends at the bar. Michael Phelps is another example of how pictures someone else posts on the Internet can come back to haunt you. Because of his pics with him smoking pot, he lost all endorsements from Kellogg's and a huge paycheck. So where is the line drawn between private and public? And why is this new phenomenon encouraging our youth to be such extroverts with information and private details?
Logging in to Facebook these days is almost too overwhelming for me. I have many friends that like to give up-to-the-minute information about their day to day lives. They can simply log on and tell their whole world what they are doing as often as they like.
Katie is... eating at The Dodo!
An hour later, Katie is... Done eating at The Dodo! Onto the mall!
An hour later, Katie is... Tired of the mall! Heading home to make spaghetti!
An hour later, Katie is... Full of yummy spaghetti! Yum Yum!! Time for a movie!
Two hours later, Katie is... Loving Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist!!
And so on.....
Why do we feel the need to update our status during each activity of our day? Why do you want people to know exactly what you are doing and where you are at all times?!
Not only can updates be annoying, but can they also be dangerous? There have been many cases of violence associated to Facebook and status updates in the last five years.
One headline reads, "Husband hacked wife to death with meat cleaver after she changed Facebook status to single". A man actually murdered his wife because of the "embarrassment her status changed caused him". In another story, a man who had seen his wife's profile status changed to "Splitting up with Husband" came home and brutally murdered the mother of their two girls, and then drilled holes in his arms and legs with a power tool in a nearby park where he later died of shock. How serious should we be taking these status changes? Should we really be announcing divorces, deaths in the family, and other serious issues on a website originally created for college students to keep in touch? As I wrote about in my first blog, Phonebook or Facebook, I was stunned to hear about my cousin's death over a Facebook instant message, but I am not alone. There are many cases of deaths being announced online, and declaring the "single" status after a divorce is proving to be an upcoming trend.
Along with announcing divorces, posting an "in a relationship" status is a must for dating these days. After hearing about a friend dating someone, I have caught myself asking, "Is it Facebook official?" By putting who you are in a relationship with on Facebook, it has a more "official" standing, it is like the last step in deciding you are exclusive. Announcing to your 1,ooo "friends" that you care enough about this person to post that you are dating says something, but is it saying too much?
When I got divorced, all of my close friends knew it was coming for months, so it was no surprise when it actually happened. I consider myself a pretty private person, and I do not like other to know too much about my personal life and my relationships within it. But when all was said and done, no one else caught on when I had moved thousands of miles away from the dreaded ex to live on an island, it was the Facebook status change to "single" that made the masses realize it was over. Go figure.
Not only is it a tad humiliating to go through a break-up, it feels like social suicide to have to announce it online. But if you don't change your status, people wonder why, and then you look like a desperate cling-on if he has already changed his status, so really, it is a necessity whether you like it or not. There is pressure to keep your profile updated and in sync with the rate of gossip and chit chat. I was dating my boyfriend for about five months before we even thought to change our status, and as soon as we did, we got comments form all sorts of people claiming, "It's about time!" or "Yay! Finally!!" like we had taken a further step in our relationship or something! Like Facebook acknowledgement is the mid-point between dating and engagement.
Another pressure that we are all faced with is who to put in our Top Ten. Do we put boyfriend over girlfriends, new friends higher than old friends? The pressure to get the right ranking is exhausting and feels impossible at times! There is never a time when everyone is satisfied. But why should I have to rank my friends anyway? Don't they know how much I value our friendship by the amount of time we spend together? Apparently not.
There are many reasons to have a Facebook account, and don't get me wrong, I adore mine, but there continue to be many new reasons not to.
Not only does this site have more than 200 million users, the average user has 120 friends, and more than 3.5 billion minutes are spent on the site daily.(Facebook.com)
What happened to strolls in the park and shopping at the mall with friends? How much has Facebook affected our daily lives as teens, college students, and Americans as a whole?
There are many entrepreneurs that have started a Facebook page for their companies, many artists who display pictures or music for easy viewing, and many viewers that would rather stay indoors on their computers, in the comfort of their own homes, instead of wandering malls, visiting galleries, or going to concerts. There are more than 660,000 developers and entrepreneurs from more than 180 countries on Facebook now. (Facebook.com)
Is this bad for our generation and the small businesses of America? Is it smarter to start an online company now instead renting a space in a mall? What is to be said about advancements in online purchases and the digital divide? How could our parents or grandparents go shopping if most brands move exclusively online?
Facebook does create a way for us to keep in touch with one another, but it has also begun to pose a threat on our private lives and identity. It has created a place for us to write our minds and label ourselves, but has also given the opportunity for others to label us. Although it seems like a harmless networking site, Facebook is creating many challenges we as a generation are going to have to adapt to and learn from. The Facebook Frenzy will continue for years to come, I am sure, but will it inevitably be the destruction of our face-to-face time, and will it change the authenticity of the word "friend" for good?
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Love at First...Message?
Match.com Decoding the Profile
The new phenomenon of dating online has become more and more common for us, and for our parents. It is a way to connect to thousands of different people in different areas of the world, that are looking for a friendship, relationship, and love. As magnificent as online dating seems, there are quite a few negative aspects that potential daters have to be aware of and look out for.
First of all, by online dating, you allow yourself to be a person that is created by an online profile. Your profile is all that others have to go off of to base an opinion around, which causes most people to exaggerate just a bit. The sites such as Match.com, eHarmony.com, and yahoopersonals.com, encourage you to be "warm and interesting" and to leave viewers with a "sell-line" that will help them remember you. You basically have to put an image of yourself online, they say "No pix, no picks!" and encourage you to be as honest as possible with your answers to the questionnaire. But lets be honest, when they have a section for interests and you are able to pick as many as you would like, who is really going to limit themselves? Don't we think the more interests a person has, the more interesting the person must be?
My aunt, Michelle*, has been online dating for years. She loved the experience at first- the excitement of chatting with new people, the getting to know others and sharing information about yourself. But eventually, she let her guard down, decided to meet a few guys face-to-face, and wound up experiencing some of the negative aspects of online "profile dating".
She, of course wanting to make herself seem "warm and interesting" clicked a few interests that might not have been entirely honest. She clicked everything from camping to water polo- which in truth, she has probably camped once, and never actually seen, let alone played, a water polo game in her life. Her photo was a little outdated, but who's isn't, right? The point is to look good, catch some attention up front, and then after you chat for a while, he wont mind that you are 20lbs thinner in your picture.
After meeting her "tall, dark, and handsome" men in person, who, the majority of the time, turned out to be bald, short, and average at best, she got very discouraged. And out of nowhere, she finally met a very handsome guy, who lived out of the state, who had a great career, and was a widower looking for new love. Or so his profile said.
Turned out he lied about his wife passing away due to cancer, was still married to a very healthy wife, and had three children! He was using these dating websites as a tool of manipulation and deceit, and using these women's trust and vulnerability to feed upon. There is no way to monitor his honesty, to validate his profile, or to warn other women about his scheme. He is free in the online world to be whoever he wants, and to create whatever person he wants to be.
Most people like to think that they are productive, stylish, beautiful, and hard-working. These sites tell you to "put your best self forward" so who is really going to put "round" for figure shape, or "lazy" for a personality trait? Are there different levels of honesty that online worlds have created? Are the expected amounts of honesty different in real life versus online? What expectations do we have for how honest people should be and how accurate profiles really are?
According to the US Census , 44% of American Adults are single, 40% have tried online dating, AND there are more than 120,000 marriages a year that occur as a result of online dating in the U.S. (WomensOnlineDatingCoach.com). So you have to think that with that high of a number for marriages, something can be said for talking or meeting someone over the Internet. With online dating being so new, it is hard to find any divorce statistics at all, but I am curious to see in the future what the number turn out to be, and how compatible these people matched really are.
So how has online dating changed face-to-face time? I agree with the fact that online dating has given those who are "too busy" to date an outlet that they can control on their own time, and surf through possible matches when they get time, but whatever happened to finding someone attractive, starting a conversation, asking them to dinner, and seeing where it goes from there? Now it is all about how much time you spend on your computer and how many sites you are willing to pay a monthly fee for.
I understand the advantages for introverts, or for people who are on the shy side in public places, but isn't writing messages a huge disadvantage for those outgoing and energetic people whose personality can not really be portrayed through exclamation marks and smiley faces? So is it fair to say that online dating is not beneficial to all types of people? Or can it be argued that all people experience the same physical and emotional reaction to a message from a stranger expressing interest in you? Should online dating be taken more seriously by sceptical crowds or should serious online daters find other outlets and meeting places as well?
From Forrester Research Inc, in 2008 the online dating industry earned $957 million. This makes it the third highest revenue grossing industry.(Datingsitesreview.com)
My question is, although these sites are providing a service for what they are being paid for, are these sites taking advantage of desperate or extremely lonely individuals and promising results they can not guarantee? Is it fair to take advantage of ones loneliness and prey upon the unhappy or desperate part of the population?
How long do you think the trend of online dating will continue to increase? And if it does continue to increase, will the odds of finding a man in the real world versus the online world decrease? Where is the line drawn between priorities? I mean, if we don't have time to concentrate on the number one aspect of our personal life, meeting our true love, or finding our soul mate, what does that say about our values and meaning of life? Since more time has been spent on work and professional matters, has their importance superseded personal happiness and finding love? Have these sites enabled more people to put love second, and make it a thing to try whenever they get the time? These are all questions that only time can answer, unfortunately, and I am very curious to see how values evolve as the online dating trend increases.
The new phenomenon of dating online has become more and more common for us, and for our parents. It is a way to connect to thousands of different people in different areas of the world, that are looking for a friendship, relationship, and love. As magnificent as online dating seems, there are quite a few negative aspects that potential daters have to be aware of and look out for.
First of all, by online dating, you allow yourself to be a person that is created by an online profile. Your profile is all that others have to go off of to base an opinion around, which causes most people to exaggerate just a bit. The sites such as Match.com, eHarmony.com, and yahoopersonals.com, encourage you to be "warm and interesting" and to leave viewers with a "sell-line" that will help them remember you. You basically have to put an image of yourself online, they say "No pix, no picks!" and encourage you to be as honest as possible with your answers to the questionnaire. But lets be honest, when they have a section for interests and you are able to pick as many as you would like, who is really going to limit themselves? Don't we think the more interests a person has, the more interesting the person must be?
My aunt, Michelle*, has been online dating for years. She loved the experience at first- the excitement of chatting with new people, the getting to know others and sharing information about yourself. But eventually, she let her guard down, decided to meet a few guys face-to-face, and wound up experiencing some of the negative aspects of online "profile dating".
She, of course wanting to make herself seem "warm and interesting" clicked a few interests that might not have been entirely honest. She clicked everything from camping to water polo- which in truth, she has probably camped once, and never actually seen, let alone played, a water polo game in her life. Her photo was a little outdated, but who's isn't, right? The point is to look good, catch some attention up front, and then after you chat for a while, he wont mind that you are 20lbs thinner in your picture.
After meeting her "tall, dark, and handsome" men in person, who, the majority of the time, turned out to be bald, short, and average at best, she got very discouraged. And out of nowhere, she finally met a very handsome guy, who lived out of the state, who had a great career, and was a widower looking for new love. Or so his profile said.
Turned out he lied about his wife passing away due to cancer, was still married to a very healthy wife, and had three children! He was using these dating websites as a tool of manipulation and deceit, and using these women's trust and vulnerability to feed upon. There is no way to monitor his honesty, to validate his profile, or to warn other women about his scheme. He is free in the online world to be whoever he wants, and to create whatever person he wants to be.
Most people like to think that they are productive, stylish, beautiful, and hard-working. These sites tell you to "put your best self forward" so who is really going to put "round" for figure shape, or "lazy" for a personality trait? Are there different levels of honesty that online worlds have created? Are the expected amounts of honesty different in real life versus online? What expectations do we have for how honest people should be and how accurate profiles really are?
According to the US Census , 44% of American Adults are single, 40% have tried online dating, AND there are more than 120,000 marriages a year that occur as a result of online dating in the U.S. (WomensOnlineDatingCoach.com). So you have to think that with that high of a number for marriages, something can be said for talking or meeting someone over the Internet. With online dating being so new, it is hard to find any divorce statistics at all, but I am curious to see in the future what the number turn out to be, and how compatible these people matched really are.
So how has online dating changed face-to-face time? I agree with the fact that online dating has given those who are "too busy" to date an outlet that they can control on their own time, and surf through possible matches when they get time, but whatever happened to finding someone attractive, starting a conversation, asking them to dinner, and seeing where it goes from there? Now it is all about how much time you spend on your computer and how many sites you are willing to pay a monthly fee for.
I understand the advantages for introverts, or for people who are on the shy side in public places, but isn't writing messages a huge disadvantage for those outgoing and energetic people whose personality can not really be portrayed through exclamation marks and smiley faces? So is it fair to say that online dating is not beneficial to all types of people? Or can it be argued that all people experience the same physical and emotional reaction to a message from a stranger expressing interest in you? Should online dating be taken more seriously by sceptical crowds or should serious online daters find other outlets and meeting places as well?
From Forrester Research Inc, in 2008 the online dating industry earned $957 million. This makes it the third highest revenue grossing industry.(Datingsitesreview.com)
My question is, although these sites are providing a service for what they are being paid for, are these sites taking advantage of desperate or extremely lonely individuals and promising results they can not guarantee? Is it fair to take advantage of ones loneliness and prey upon the unhappy or desperate part of the population?
How long do you think the trend of online dating will continue to increase? And if it does continue to increase, will the odds of finding a man in the real world versus the online world decrease? Where is the line drawn between priorities? I mean, if we don't have time to concentrate on the number one aspect of our personal life, meeting our true love, or finding our soul mate, what does that say about our values and meaning of life? Since more time has been spent on work and professional matters, has their importance superseded personal happiness and finding love? Have these sites enabled more people to put love second, and make it a thing to try whenever they get the time? These are all questions that only time can answer, unfortunately, and I am very curious to see how values evolve as the online dating trend increases.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
The Tantalizing Telephone
Texting While Driving Link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDlYSPVro0Q
I think that our generation has become so engrossed in our technology that we rarely stop to think if our actions are appropriate anymore. With the divide between generations and the difference in communication, a cell phone at dinner may seem natural to someone my age, but it considered impolite and flat out rude to parents or grandparents. Family time has changed from generation to generation, which in turn has caused our values to change. With each new technology developed, a larger gap is formed between child and grandparent, between parenting and control, between child and face-to-face time. Cell phones have everything from dialing capabilities to Internet, from a camera to a video player, these days. The idea that one can separate themselves from technology entirely at any point throughout the day has become a laughing matter. Whether you are at the dinner table or in class, you can receive emails from work, notifications on your phone from emails delivered from your work, a voicemail describing the emails from work, and a text asking you if you have gotten the emails sent. There is no escaping the train of technology, and it feels as though something as simple as family dinner will inevitably be interrupted in some way.
What has changed in the minds of the new generations? Why has talking on your phone become normal and respect levels dropped? Where does the disrespect boundary begin and end? And has the level of respect been compromised because of technology developments?
We have all been out to eat with that one person that can not set down their phone. There is nothing more annoying then talking to someone, and right in the middle of your conversation, BEEP! BEEP! The text alert goes off and the attention is immediately shifted. You continue talking, you keep telling your story, and your friend is completely distracted while she opens the text, nods as if she is still listening, and then continues to start typing back as if it is not rude or affecting your conversation in the slightest. So what are you supposed to do? Keep talking? Stop until they have responded? Its an awkward moment. You start talking a little slower, because you are distracted watching her scramble through the process, and by the time her phone says "Message Sent" you have forgotten what you were saying anyways.
How would this have been different five years ago? Ten years ago? My mother gets so angry whenever we go out to eat because my phone goes off at least once during the meal. If I were smart, I would turn it on silent mode, but most of the time, I don't even think about it.I am used to being interrupted and it doesn't bother me as much as it does her. Everything from daily alarms, horoscopes, invitations from guest lists for clubs, friends making plans for the night, daily quotes, and BIM messages come through on a daily basis. I have gotten so used to opening and closing them, it doesn't even phase me anymore. My mother on the other hand, has a phone that can take pictures, that does have SMS and MMS messaging capabilities, and can connect to the Internet if needed, but she only uses it for one thing- to call people. She has never sent a text, she has no idea how to receive a message or to take a picture, and could not download an application for anything if her life depended on it. All of which I make fun of her for, give her a hard time about, and ultimately think of her as "behind the times"- but who's "time" is the right "time" to be in? She has more time to talk face-to face, she rarely gets interrupted at all throughout her day, and she uses technology for what she needs it for and controls when that is. As many laughs as I have gotten watching her try to send a text or pull up an email, I'm sure she could get ten times more seeing how attached my friends and I are to our phones and how we jump at every beep they make, or how pathetic we look trying to respond to a text from a cute boy and how frantic we are if the battery dies on a Friday afternoon.
Not only does texting create an impolite existence, it also presents many dangers. I was shocked when I started researching texting stats and how much the trend has caught on. From creating its own language, to causing deadly accidents, texting has become a part of everyday life. I ran across a Dr. Phil episode where he had a young girl on that sends about 5,000 texts a month. 5,000. She admits to texting while driving and even getting into minor accidents because of texting behind the wheel. It shocked me to think that there are teens so addicted to texting and up-to-the-minute-updates, that they are willing to sacrifice their safety and the safety of others on the road. At what point does the law have to step in? And how effective can a No Texting law be, being so hard to enforce or to monitor? Why has chatting over SMS placed such a spell over our teens and how has it changed priorities and values? And how can we convince these who are addicted that it IS in fact dangerous? These are all questions that we will be asking, and hopefully answering, in the years to come. The more preventative measures we take, the better educated the younger generations can be on the risks associated with new technologies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDlYSPVro0Q
I think that our generation has become so engrossed in our technology that we rarely stop to think if our actions are appropriate anymore. With the divide between generations and the difference in communication, a cell phone at dinner may seem natural to someone my age, but it considered impolite and flat out rude to parents or grandparents. Family time has changed from generation to generation, which in turn has caused our values to change. With each new technology developed, a larger gap is formed between child and grandparent, between parenting and control, between child and face-to-face time. Cell phones have everything from dialing capabilities to Internet, from a camera to a video player, these days. The idea that one can separate themselves from technology entirely at any point throughout the day has become a laughing matter. Whether you are at the dinner table or in class, you can receive emails from work, notifications on your phone from emails delivered from your work, a voicemail describing the emails from work, and a text asking you if you have gotten the emails sent. There is no escaping the train of technology, and it feels as though something as simple as family dinner will inevitably be interrupted in some way.
What has changed in the minds of the new generations? Why has talking on your phone become normal and respect levels dropped? Where does the disrespect boundary begin and end? And has the level of respect been compromised because of technology developments?
We have all been out to eat with that one person that can not set down their phone. There is nothing more annoying then talking to someone, and right in the middle of your conversation, BEEP! BEEP! The text alert goes off and the attention is immediately shifted. You continue talking, you keep telling your story, and your friend is completely distracted while she opens the text, nods as if she is still listening, and then continues to start typing back as if it is not rude or affecting your conversation in the slightest. So what are you supposed to do? Keep talking? Stop until they have responded? Its an awkward moment. You start talking a little slower, because you are distracted watching her scramble through the process, and by the time her phone says "Message Sent" you have forgotten what you were saying anyways.
How would this have been different five years ago? Ten years ago? My mother gets so angry whenever we go out to eat because my phone goes off at least once during the meal. If I were smart, I would turn it on silent mode, but most of the time, I don't even think about it.I am used to being interrupted and it doesn't bother me as much as it does her. Everything from daily alarms, horoscopes, invitations from guest lists for clubs, friends making plans for the night, daily quotes, and BIM messages come through on a daily basis. I have gotten so used to opening and closing them, it doesn't even phase me anymore. My mother on the other hand, has a phone that can take pictures, that does have SMS and MMS messaging capabilities, and can connect to the Internet if needed, but she only uses it for one thing- to call people. She has never sent a text, she has no idea how to receive a message or to take a picture, and could not download an application for anything if her life depended on it. All of which I make fun of her for, give her a hard time about, and ultimately think of her as "behind the times"- but who's "time" is the right "time" to be in? She has more time to talk face-to face, she rarely gets interrupted at all throughout her day, and she uses technology for what she needs it for and controls when that is. As many laughs as I have gotten watching her try to send a text or pull up an email, I'm sure she could get ten times more seeing how attached my friends and I are to our phones and how we jump at every beep they make, or how pathetic we look trying to respond to a text from a cute boy and how frantic we are if the battery dies on a Friday afternoon.
Not only does texting create an impolite existence, it also presents many dangers. I was shocked when I started researching texting stats and how much the trend has caught on. From creating its own language, to causing deadly accidents, texting has become a part of everyday life. I ran across a Dr. Phil episode where he had a young girl on that sends about 5,000 texts a month. 5,000. She admits to texting while driving and even getting into minor accidents because of texting behind the wheel. It shocked me to think that there are teens so addicted to texting and up-to-the-minute-updates, that they are willing to sacrifice their safety and the safety of others on the road. At what point does the law have to step in? And how effective can a No Texting law be, being so hard to enforce or to monitor? Why has chatting over SMS placed such a spell over our teens and how has it changed priorities and values? And how can we convince these who are addicted that it IS in fact dangerous? These are all questions that we will be asking, and hopefully answering, in the years to come. The more preventative measures we take, the better educated the younger generations can be on the risks associated with new technologies.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Do you reach for Phonebook or Facebook?
I have been aware lately of the control that my my technology has over me, and also of how my relationships, both family and friends, have been affected by my Facebook or Blackberry habits. I admit, I automatically check my profile every time I log onto the Internet, almost as if my fingers type it into the address bar without me even thinking about it. It is a bad habit that I have only noticed recently.
I normally don't have a problem with Facebooking people or old friends you have lost contact with over the years. I actually think it was a great idea for students to be able to connect with other students at their college or in their classes with little effort. I appreciated it my second year in college, when it was new, and you actually needed to be enrolled in a university and have a school account to log in. Now, I find myself questioning the people I actually accept as "friends" and wondering about how real people are all together. It is easy to ask someone for lunch on a web page, and back out just as easily. Or to be fake and ask someone how they are doing, when it is not genuine concern, just boredom that leads you to their profile.
I think it is great to be able to post pictures and to keep others updated on information or events that have happened in your life, but are we really saying that picking up a phone is too difficult? Is sending pictures to a friend too much of a hassle these days? Is reaching for a phonebook and dialing a number too much effort to ask a friend to lunch? If so, I am worried where our personal relationships are headed in the next five years.
Last Sunday, I was online researching for a paper I was writing, and of course, I was logged into my Facebook account on another window. I noticed a flashing New Message sign and so I clicked on to see who was online. A cousin that I had not seen for several years until recently when I had run into her during Sundance, who had requested me as a friend only weeks before,had sent me a message.
"Did you hear the bad news?"
I hesitantly wrote back, "Oh no, what bad news?"
Immediately she responded, "Cody died."
I was floored. Our cousin who was a year younger than us, had died. And I found out over Facebook.
I had no idea what to write back. What do you write to that? I wouldn't even know what to say let alone write. I wrote back,
"I can't believe this. Be strong, Ive gotta go. I'll talk to you later."
I hurried and logged off, saved my paper, and called my grandmother.
"Hello?"
"Gram? This is Britt. What is going on?"
"Nothing much, darling. How are you?"
"I just talked to Taylor. What happened! Why didn't you call me?!", I cried.
"We just found out, honey! Not even an hour ago! I was going to call you, but my phone has been ringing off the wall. Now how did you find out? Who did you talk to?"
I paused, "Taylor. She Instant Messaged me on Facebook."
"She what on where?" My grandmother sounded so confused. It was then that I realized that she probably had no idea what Facebook was or how I even get an Instant Message, or how the heck Taylor and I were even talking, knowing it had been almost a decade since we had seen them.
I tried to explain Facebook, and how you can send messages to each other, and how she told me through it, but all my grandma got out of it was, "You found out on your computer?! She could have at least had the decency to call you."
And I realized, she was right. A phone call was in order.
I sat there and thought about how normal Facebook and computer conversations are to our generation and how little we are phased by types of communication. The faster the better, the least effort applied the better, the less verbal communication the better, really. It shocked me to think that in this day and age, we are to the point where I could find out over a computer program and profile page that my dear cousin had passed away. And I was surprised to find out that I was angry. It made me question her technology relationships, my technology values, and what boundaries I was going to set up to filter my Facebook or Internet chat. What is acceptable to "say" online? What news is "phone-worthy"? I have heard of countless divorces through Facebook, that many people consider gossip, but no one is angry when you spread news about an engagement. Why is a divorce any more of gossip than a marriage? I have heard of countless babies being born to my friends online, so why is death different to me? Is it the negative aspect of a situation that makes us think it needs to be more personally delivered? Where do we draw a line between appropriate and inappropriate online conversation content? It is a grey line that Im sure we will all cross at one point to one person over something. Then question is when and where and to what extreme.
I normally don't have a problem with Facebooking people or old friends you have lost contact with over the years. I actually think it was a great idea for students to be able to connect with other students at their college or in their classes with little effort. I appreciated it my second year in college, when it was new, and you actually needed to be enrolled in a university and have a school account to log in. Now, I find myself questioning the people I actually accept as "friends" and wondering about how real people are all together. It is easy to ask someone for lunch on a web page, and back out just as easily. Or to be fake and ask someone how they are doing, when it is not genuine concern, just boredom that leads you to their profile.
I think it is great to be able to post pictures and to keep others updated on information or events that have happened in your life, but are we really saying that picking up a phone is too difficult? Is sending pictures to a friend too much of a hassle these days? Is reaching for a phonebook and dialing a number too much effort to ask a friend to lunch? If so, I am worried where our personal relationships are headed in the next five years.
Last Sunday, I was online researching for a paper I was writing, and of course, I was logged into my Facebook account on another window. I noticed a flashing New Message sign and so I clicked on to see who was online. A cousin that I had not seen for several years until recently when I had run into her during Sundance, who had requested me as a friend only weeks before,had sent me a message.
"Did you hear the bad news?"
I hesitantly wrote back, "Oh no, what bad news?"
Immediately she responded, "Cody died."
I was floored. Our cousin who was a year younger than us, had died. And I found out over Facebook.
I had no idea what to write back. What do you write to that? I wouldn't even know what to say let alone write. I wrote back,
"I can't believe this. Be strong, Ive gotta go. I'll talk to you later."
I hurried and logged off, saved my paper, and called my grandmother.
"Hello?"
"Gram? This is Britt. What is going on?"
"Nothing much, darling. How are you?"
"I just talked to Taylor. What happened! Why didn't you call me?!", I cried.
"We just found out, honey! Not even an hour ago! I was going to call you, but my phone has been ringing off the wall. Now how did you find out? Who did you talk to?"
I paused, "Taylor. She Instant Messaged me on Facebook."
"She what on where?" My grandmother sounded so confused. It was then that I realized that she probably had no idea what Facebook was or how I even get an Instant Message, or how the heck Taylor and I were even talking, knowing it had been almost a decade since we had seen them.
I tried to explain Facebook, and how you can send messages to each other, and how she told me through it, but all my grandma got out of it was, "You found out on your computer?! She could have at least had the decency to call you."
And I realized, she was right. A phone call was in order.
I sat there and thought about how normal Facebook and computer conversations are to our generation and how little we are phased by types of communication. The faster the better, the least effort applied the better, the less verbal communication the better, really. It shocked me to think that in this day and age, we are to the point where I could find out over a computer program and profile page that my dear cousin had passed away. And I was surprised to find out that I was angry. It made me question her technology relationships, my technology values, and what boundaries I was going to set up to filter my Facebook or Internet chat. What is acceptable to "say" online? What news is "phone-worthy"? I have heard of countless divorces through Facebook, that many people consider gossip, but no one is angry when you spread news about an engagement. Why is a divorce any more of gossip than a marriage? I have heard of countless babies being born to my friends online, so why is death different to me? Is it the negative aspect of a situation that makes us think it needs to be more personally delivered? Where do we draw a line between appropriate and inappropriate online conversation content? It is a grey line that Im sure we will all cross at one point to one person over something. Then question is when and where and to what extreme.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Relationships and Media
This a blog about our relationships in this day and age and how technology has enhanced or deteriorated our closeness to one another.
It is an interesting subject for me because I have been blissfully unaware of how technology has impacted my life up to this point. I have been a follower of trends, a buyer of "must-haves", and a listener to whoever the crowd says has authority on technology. I have become victim to texting, laptop-time, and all around Internet surfing.
The more I read, the more afraid I get that I am being ran by my technology, instead of the other way around. This is a discovery blog to stretch my thinking, become aware of my current surroundings, and to identify and better understand my media.
It is an interesting subject for me because I have been blissfully unaware of how technology has impacted my life up to this point. I have been a follower of trends, a buyer of "must-haves", and a listener to whoever the crowd says has authority on technology. I have become victim to texting, laptop-time, and all around Internet surfing.
The more I read, the more afraid I get that I am being ran by my technology, instead of the other way around. This is a discovery blog to stretch my thinking, become aware of my current surroundings, and to identify and better understand my media.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
