Personality Cafe banner

How many hours do you spend a week on Social Media sites or playing Video games?

  • Less than 2 hours

    Votes: 4 9.8%
  • Two hours to eight hours

    Votes: 10 24.4%
  • Nine hours to 16 hours

    Votes: 3 7.3%
  • Over 16 hours a week including weekends

    Votes: 24 58.5%

  • Total voters
    41
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
PART 1: SOCIAL MEDIA

Social Media such as PC's forum, and other forum and blog host, WordPress, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Tumblr, Google plus +, etc. are absorbing a big piece of our leisure time. Social Media interaction is two dimensional at best, compared to the three (maybe four) dimensions to interactive face to face or group contact. The depth perception added in "real" human contact is significant, the depth perception lost in Social Media contact is significant. So many visual, verbal, and other sensory abilities have no place in Social Media contact. Our mental models of our Social Media relationships are eschewed, and while perceptions, bias, and misinterpretations of real time and space human contact is full of false preconceptions, all these are added to and multiplied in Social Media contact.

We understand and know little about people from face to face conversations and casual contact. We not only know less in Social Media contact, but deception is part of all interactions in Social Media. Something's you can't hide when eye to eye, but our fantasies allow us tremendous latitude in deceiving others in Social Media. So much so it's really part of the normal interactions.

Does our increasing Social Media relationships, hamstring our face to face or group interactions. Are we being taught deception is part of all human interaction? Are we losing skills of perception, intuition, sensing, and reading other humans during conversations and listening and observing speeches, or others dialogs. And are Social Media relationships a danger in their own medium, making us easier prey to be manipulated by unethical, narcissistic, sociopaths, or even predators of various sorts?

Explain why you think this should be a real concern or is superfluous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
I think social media will evolve to take advantage of our sensory abilities. After all, we've come a long way from Bulletin board systems and dial up. As internet and consumer technology develops, more advanced social media platforms would allow us to mimic human interaction to a greater degree.

The idea of privacy and staying relatively anonymous on the internet has been long abandoned by social media companies, we're moving towards a universally integrated and public social networking system, where deception would not be any more prevalent than in real human interaction.

Social media has already reacted and is in the process of adapting to the problems you've mentioned. However, the problem of becoming dependent on technology still remains.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Social media has already reacted and is in the process of adapting to the problems you've mentioned. However, the problem of becoming dependent on technology still remains.
Really? Could you not pretend to be anyone, gender, personality, profession, or whatever on this forum? Could you explain how Social Media currently has adapted, the popular ones? Even if we could project as holograms and communicate which is about as far ahead as I can imagine right now, we would still lack so much cues versus real human interactions. And knowing that we have many more than 6 or 7 senses, some we understand, some we only know they exist, others we most like don't know at all. Impossible. peace.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,801 Posts
Generation X built the tech. Generation Y carried it forward and improved it. Generation Z was born when the tech became a normal facet of society.

Thing is, its a luxury now in our time, and we have not fully become aware of its true necessity and capability as a tool for societal advancement. So, as a plus to our quality of life, we use and abuse it as it makes us happy. The absence of the understanding of its importance allows us to simply believe that it is no more than just an improvement on life.

We understand and know little about people from face to face conversations and casual contact. We not only know less in Social Media contact, but deception is part of all interactions in Social Media. Something's you can't hide when eye to eye, but our fantasies allow us tremendous latitude in deceiving others in Social Media. So much so it's really part of the normal interactions.
I agree. This dynamic has already shaped Generation Z's ability to engage in successful interactions with the opposite sex, for example.


Are we being taught deception is part of all human interaction?
All human interaction is a form of persuasion, whether having a debate/exchanging ideas, or simply getting to know somebody (putting yourself into perspective). Translating your thoughts into a legible form is something you could call persuasion, as the higher of a degree you do it, the more acceptable your information is. Online, and more specifically textual conversations, has been and is more vulnerable to harbour deception. It is simply inherent, due to your previous explanation of the lack of several fundamental channels of social information.

Are we losing skills of perception, intuition, sensing, and reading other humans during conversations and listening and observing speeches, or others dialogs(?)
At the current time, yes. As online interaction becomes the primary and preferred choice of communication, this generation will hone these skills better than us, but lack the others that we have been more exposed to.

And are Social Media relationships a danger in their own medium, making us easier prey to be manipulated by unethical, narcissistic, sociopaths, or even predators of various sorts?
That's an interesting thought. Here's some brain food:

In accepted society, our parents, older generations, have always held this stereotypical "nagginess" and traditionalist vibe that irritates the younger generation. Why? Humans don't like change, they fear it, you get comfortable with a tried and true method, and it allows you to survive, when this changes, you become defensive and even defiant, pushing even further into your own method.

This happens on both sides. And this reoccurs every generation.


The funny thing? The younger generation will create, grow, and thrive in this environment, it's what they have chosen to shape, and what they deem is a comfortable and productive life for them. It's almost like evolution, the progression and advancement of society. Their method will work for them, like our method worked for our generation... and it will always irk the older generation.

So, back to the question, who's to say that this method wont have its advantages and disadvantages? (just like every generation)
Regardless, they will find a way to adapt and overcome like generations previous, and become aware of these issues. With all of the possible forms of communication that this future will have, the discovery and social commentary on these issues may be so easily accessible that it prevents their ignorance on them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
Really? Could you not pretend to be anyone, gender, personality, profession, or whatever on this forum? Could you explain how Social Media currently has adapted, the popular ones?
Popular social media is in the stage of adapting. It's visible in the policy stages of certain internet companies such as Google. They're pushing for complete integration between services and with this, checking the validity of their user base. Personal information is being validated by Google.

Of course, there are ways to overcome this, but from what I've observed the average user is more likely to accept it than go through the trouble. For example, Google+ integration with Youtube was announced as an optional feature that people were encouraged to connect with, but eventually it became a requirement. They were able to do this because around 80% of the user base had already switched. It is in part to do with collecting more data on people, but also about legitimizing their user base.

The internet is losing it's anonymity. And with that, the problem of deception is likely to ebb away. At least, I think so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eggsies

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,130 Posts
I'd like to point out that this kinda thing happens every time new media pops up. TV killed the radio star. And books. Presumably newpapers too. Except that it didn't. It's not how we work, we don't replace - we augment. It's like people flailing their arms because big business is destroying indigenous cultures except that it's very hard to actually destroy a culture and takes concerted effort. When you pay attention though you notice that these cultures aren't being destroyed they're being changed, and all too often it's a two way street. So no, I don't think social media is harming more mainstream social interaction just adding another facet. Of course it might be bad in excess but so is every single thing in existence. Too much of anything is bad.

But now I'd like to know why "normal" social interaction is desirable above interaction happening on social media? You gave a very, very lopsided view. Actual social interaction comes with its benefits, it also comes with drawbacks. Same with social media. They're not antagonistic opposites they're just different. So why, I ask again, is actual, physical social interaction preferable to interaction taking place through say electronics?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,456 Posts
This makes me think of someone who has only ever walked, and is now terrified for all these children who are suddenly running and skipping and jumping. How will they ever walk if all they do is run and skip and jump??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Well, well. It's of little use to quote someone's post since you all played the same tune. [new stuff scares us old folks] I've been with Social Media since IRC (Internet Relay Chat), and AOL, whose community sites, chat rooms, and bulletin boards, were running around 20 years ago. (the early pioneers were up and running in the mid 80's) Opps, that wasn't neither the x,y,z generation was it? I think it was really the Baby Boomers who built the tech. Facebook and Wordpress among others were just packaging alterations. So poo on the "we scared" crap, we built it, used it, and bought the tech for our kids.

However, what the X, Y, Z generations have done is integrated it into most social interactions, and greatly increased the popularity of all Social Media. The discussion about it evolving and adapting as an addition to social interaction is a very good potential. But how have we integrated technological changes in the past. Wisely?

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." (George Santayana). Consider urban sprawl, and deteriorated inner cities, global warming, environmental pollution, negative effects of the industrial revolution, nuclear power, use of carbon fuels, the decline of the American Farm, childhood obesity increases, fast food and nutrition. All the results of foresight and planning?

Corporations will introduce any product that increases the bottom line, based only on profit motive. Our governments oversight responsibilities are based on politically motivation, all of it. If you the consumer, voter, and user don't ask questions, and demand responsible evolution in this latest revolution, then like most revolutions that start and end in chaos, and it is what it is.

I really don't want to take your toys away, I play with them too. But read my post again, and consider the questions and concerns, without becoming defensive, or following the band. Resistance to change is an accepted human reaction. So is not considering the consequences while change is occurring.

Related Story: Gotham Gal: the need for more human contact
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,130 Posts
Dude. The only person becoming defensive here is you. Also are you asking about the influence of social media in general or in a strictly American setting? Those aren't the same. I don't think the intention (mine certainly wasn't) in mentioning a social backlash to new technology was to bring your age into this, being old has nothing to do with it. It's society itself that adjusts and assimilates the new media, there's always rejection going along with the acceptance. And you didn't answer my question. Why do you consider communication through social media lesser (instead of different) to normal communication? I don't think one will replace the other but assuming social media continues to gain relevance and takes up a permanent spot in human communication and even replaces some aspects of more mundane communication why will that be a bad thing? I'm not asking to be pissy I'm asking because I'm curious. You mention consequences I'm asking why these consequences are bad.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
This is the kind of question that right wing news organisations invented and put inside people's heads, and they do it because they are worried that social media is getting bigger and in the future everybody will get their news from there instead. So they try to sabotage it by going 'it's bad for your feeelings and emotionsss and friendssssss'. Absolutely nobody should legitimately have this concern in their day to day life. If you find that your friends are all drifting away from you, then it's either your fault for being a bad friend, or their fault for being bad friends. Probably your fault. It's not Angry Birds' fault, it's not some webpage's fault. Take some responsibility for your own relationships rather than blaming them on stuff and also I haven't read this thread at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
To ask a question is not necessarily to take a position, to attack, or be defensive. Concerns and questions about our use of Social Media I don't believe is agenda ridden, but legitimate since we are using 27% of our time doing it. The point about why face to face communication offers advantages I said in a previous post were; "we would still lack so much cues versus real human interactions. And knowing that we have many more than 6 or 7 senses, some we understand, some we only know they exist, others we most like don't know at all." There are advantages to communication using Social Media too maybe. I would like to know what they were, rather than expediency. This article has some revealing statistics to think about.

How do Americans use Social Media differently than other industrialized or modernized nations? Do they significantly differ? I don't know.

7 Social Media Stats of 2013 That Will Surprise You | IVN.us
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,130 Posts
~sigh~ Okay so the question this thread asks is: does social media destroy meaningful human contact. Right? Just as an aside I've made some of my best friends on the internet, we've never even met yet I value some of them higher than my actual "real life" friends. Why isn't social media meaningful human contact? You'd think with 27% of our time devoted to it some people might consider it that but whatever. Some benefits of the social media? I haven't given it much thought but off the top of my head: exposes you to new cultures, allows you to speak to a much larger group of people than you normally have access too, develops language and writing skills, allows for more honesty than some people might be comfortable due to it taking place through proxy, is instantaneous and global. But honestly I don't want to get in a pissing contest about which one is "better" since I don't see them as a threat to each other. Like at all.

I spend way, way, waaaaay more time than just 16 hours every week playing games and being on the internet. I can easily say it takes up the majority of my time. Yet I get my A's, I go out and get drunk with friends once a month or so, I do my daily 45 minutes of (cardio) exercise, I talk to people when I'm at uni, go to the mall to people watch and eat ice cream etc etc etc. I'm a completely normal, well adjusted individual. Relatively speaking. So is social media destroying meaningful human contact? Well it depends on what you consider to be meaningful I suppose. But lets say that only physical, close up communication is meaningful. Still no because something is not being destroyed if you spend less time doing it. Might there be some forms of psychosis where you become so enamored with social media that you are completely incapable of speaking to people IRL and can only reenact funny gifs? Probably. But that's an individual problem innit?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
I actually became better at socializing with others because of video games, social media and stuff like Steam and Mumble. Also, all of the most popular video games are the multiplayer ones that allow you to socialize, communicate with and fight against the most people. Stuff like Call of Duty and League of Legends for example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
No eventually you would open your door see a real 3D HD world, amazing graphics with avatars awesome and so life like. Someone would then call you a nerd and punch you. Or they would say; "hey, what's your name?"

Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top