Effects of Social Media on Peer Communication

Let’s be honest, when it comes to social media, a specific group find themselves constantly under fire - the youths. Be it about the time youths spend online or how they ‘don’t know what proper English is from all that texting’, everyone has something to say. As part of the aforementioned group of youths, I’m not going to lie, I’m a huge fan of social media. I love how it connects people, the random bits of information that go viral in a matter of hours and how communities are built around the strangest things you can imagine in social media. Of course we can’t forget what a godsend Twitter is when you’re stuck waiting at the bus stop. That being said, while social media has undisputedly changed the way we socialise, it’s not necessarily in a good way. With a social media penetration rate at 77%, Singapore far exceeds the global average of 37%, resulting in evident distortion of peer socialisation especially among youths.

THE GREEN-EYED MONSTER STRIKES AGAIN

Living in one of the world’s richest cities, we are constantly chasing after material wants, be it latest technological gadgets or the newest Vans sneakers. Social media has amplified this pursuit, facilitating unhealthy social comparison especially among youths who engage in a never-ending materialistic competition on social media (TODAYonline, 2016). Studies reveal that students tend to feel more inferior as compared to their peers due to heightened exposure to unrealistic lifestyles depicted in social media, highlighting the negative impact of social media on youths’ mental wellbeing.

THE TRUTH BEHIND THE SCREEN

Particularly worthy of note is the rise of influencers - exceptionally popular social media users paid to advertise products. The influence of these users distorts peer socialisation - a false sense of competition is created as users try to outdo each other in achieving false ideals created by pictures of lavish places or extravagant experiences posted by influencers. How many times have you found yourself sighing in envy over idyllic getaway pictures on Rachell Tan (@pxdkitty)’s Instagram? Don’t bother lying; you know we all do it. What we often don’t realise is that these pictures don’t necessarily show the reality of their lives; the glamorous lifestyle they seem to lead can be easily engineered by clever photography and editing. These people, more often than not, lead average lives just like me or you. 

BUT FIRST, LET ME TAKE A SELFIE

Remember all the embarrassing things you did when you were 15 years old? That awful haircut you thought was the epitome of coolness? Now imagine you had to go through all that but risk having every single moment documented on social media. That’s a pretty horrifying thought, right? Youths are especially vulnerable as they are in a developmental stage of their lives where they tend to be insecure in their individuality and seek to solidify their sense of self. Youths’ insecurities can be exponentially magnified by social media due to its focus on living a ‘picture-perfect’ life. The pressures of these experiences are amplified as missteps made risk being put on social media and youths becoming the object of ridicule for extended periods and by a much larger audience than before. 

Moreover, this paradoxically encourages the growth of a narcissist society which values the worth of experiences by how many likes it can get on social media, distorting peer interactions (Fishwick, 2016). Youths try to gain as many likes as possible by putting their whole life online, from the sandwich they had for lunch to arguments with their loved ones. OOTD (outfit of the day) photos are posted to gain affirmation from peers. Even the evolution of social media platforms shows the trend towards an increasingly narcissist society as we move from Facebook where users build a peer network of friends to Instagram and Twitter where users collect followers instead, denoting unequal peer power dynamics.  The increasing emphasis on social media as a gauge of a person’s worth deforms youths’ self esteems and creates a narcissist society through its implicit focus on standing out and measuring popularity with arbitrary value systems. 

BY PEOPLE, FOR PEOPLE

While social media has infinite potential to contribute to mankind’s progress, let’s not forget ultimately social media was created by and for people.  Love it or hate it, social media’s here to stay. Don’t let it control you but rather, make use of it to edify your life. Instead of just liking your friend’s Instagram post, why not drop them a message and ask them out for lunch? Every once in a while, remind yourself to put down your phone and appreciate reality instead of constantly trying to capture the perfect ‘Insta-worthy’ moment or coming up with witty Tweets. After all, what is the point of experiencing the best parts of life through a phone screen?

Reference List:

Fishwick, C. (2016). I, Narcissist – Vanity, Social Media, and the Human Condition. The Guardian. Retrieved 20 February 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/17/i-narcissist-vanity-social-media-and-the-human-condition

Todayonline. (2016). Is access to social networks harming our children?. Retrieved from http://www.todayonline.com/commentary/access-social-networks-harming-our-children

Is Social Media an Effective Tool in Natural Disaster Mitigation?

Social media has been lauded as one of the 21st century’s greatest inventions, changing the way we now interact with the media and one another. It can be defined as interactive Internet-based applications in which users are able to interact with one another through the creation and sharing of content (Obar & Wildman, 2015). There are no restrictions on joining social media platforms, increasing the diversity of users and thus content shared. Social media also allows users to access online information easily at any time. Content can be shared with others in real-time and distributed quickly. Users can also sieve through the large volume of information with ease through the search function and chronological arrangement of content. (Allaire, 2016). As such, the unique characteristics of social media makes it the seemingly perfect candidate to fill the information dearth after a natural disaster (Huang, Chan & Hyder, 2010). In recent years, social media has indeed gained a growing presence in disaster recovery as seen in the 2011 Japan Earthquake when Twitter played a crucial role in coordinating the distribution of water and electricity supplies in Tsukuba City (Kaigo, 2012).

Yet is it truly so? While there is much social media can offer, the above-mentioned characteristics of social media are also damning in proving its ineffectiveness in mitigating natural disasters. The slack entry requirements result in large volumes of unverified information, increasing confusion in a time of chaotic and thus delaying recovery. Furthermore, social media is not as accessible as portrayed since accessibility to social media is also affected by other socio-economic factors which result in a digital divide and worsening inequalities. Social media is restricted by the need for a functional telecommunications system and power source as well. These reasons thus render social media as an ineffective tool in mitigating natural disasters.

1.    Accuracy of information on social media

The lack of authoritative gatekeepers makes it extremely challenging to ensure the accuracy of the information shared online (Lindsay, 2011). The emergence of social media as a tool for information dissemination post-disaster has created an increasingly decentralized system of information production in which social media is used as a platform for the collection and distribution of information by users (Houston et al., 2014). Lindsay also asserts that the absence of gatekeepers may provide opportunities for the spread of not only unverified information but also malicious rumours such as scams(Lindsay, 2011). Such rumours and misinformation will result in more chaos, delaying the recovery. This is further supported by Obar and Wildman who point out that the anonymous function of social media reduces the reliability of the information (Obar & Wildman, 2015).

Due to the absence of a credible filter, users are exposed to exponential volumes of unverified information available on social media after natural disasters (Tomer, Goldberg & Adini, 2015). This can be very damaging as seen during the 2011 Japan Earthquake when the rapid spread of misinformation and rumours via social media resulted in a prolonged shortage of necessities such as drinking water and gasoline fuel as people started hoarding them despite the Japanese disaster headquarters negating the rumours of biochemical hazards (Kaigo, 2012). The lack of verification of information spread by social media is arguably the main cause of the unnecessary shortage and panic caused. The spread of misinformation and rumours is amplified even further due to social media’s wide outreach, exacerbating the confusion and panic and thus worsening the situation instead of aiding disaster recovery (Allaire, 2016).

2.    The Digital Divide

Many proponents of social media claim that social media acts as an socio-economic equalizing force due to the ease of access to social media (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 2013). Anyone can create an account and thus make full use of the benefits offered by social media such as its widespread outreach and speed (Lindsay, 2011). Recovery can thus be quickened through the use of social media, regardless of the user’s initial socio-economic status.

However, this notion is challenged by Madianou who contends that due to their higher level of access to social media and greater proficiency with social media, users who are better-off financially are able to better take advantage of social media as a tool for recovery activities such as fundraising, job searching and rebuilding but users with lower income are not only less likely to reap the benefits of social media fully but may also engage in risky online behavior such as gambling (Madianou, 2015). This has led to the creation of the digital divide which refers the gap between parties at different socio-economic levels in terms of access to information and communication technologies (ICT) and use of the Internet (OECD, 2001). As such, the digital divide causes differentiated rates of recovery which is highly stratified by socio-economic classes (Madianou, 2015).

The Digital in 2017 Global Overview report shows that the 10 countries with the greatest social media penetration generally follows the trend of their HDI ranking as well (We Are Social, 2017). This indicates an association between the wealth of the country and the level of proficiency with social media, further supporting Madianou’s argument. Studies also corroborated that well-educated individuals were more likely to pursue online activities that actively improved their lifestyles such as searching for financial or political information (Hargittai & Hinnant, 2008).

The digital divide can hence cause a second-order disaster which is defined as a humanly perpetuated disaster post-crisis with impacts that can surpass that of the initial disaster (Adams, 2013). As observed by Madianou, the 2013 Typhoon Haiyan demonstrated the harmful impacts social media can cause post-disaster. The 10-month study conducted found that low income participants’ living conditions post-disasters experienced little change, indicating a delay in recovery, while wealthier participants were recovering well and even doing better than they were pre-disaster due to the different types and levels of social media activity the different groups of participants engaged in (Madianou, 2015).

As such, social media acts as a pyrrhic recovery tool which can result in the worsening socio-economic inequalities due to the digital divide between the wealthy and poor instead of acting as an equalizer.

3.    Technological limitations of social media

Social media, while useful in disaster recovery efforts, is ultimately still limited technologically as it requires a functional telecommunications system and a reliable power source. One of the biggest draws of social media as a tool post-disaster is its portability as it can be accessed on any computing device (Houston et al., 2014). However, these mobile devices also run on a limited power supply (Laituri & Kodrich, 2008). Lindsay further corroborates this by pointing out that in 2011, many Hurricane Irene victims experienced power outages which lasted more than 2 days which far exceeds the 12-h battery lives of the average smartphone and tablets depending on usage (Lindsay, 2011). As such overreliance on social media post-disaster could cause more problems instead.

Moreover, critical infrastructure is very much needed to support not only the use of social media in disaster recovery efforts but also other recovery services such as emergency medical aid and thus plays a (The World Bank, 2010). However, such infrastructure is commonly damaged during disasters, resulting in a reduced capacity to perform its function at a time when information is in high demand due to the uncertainty caused by the disaster (Shklovski, Burke, Kiesler & Kraut, 2010).

Furthermore, critical infrastructure is susceptible to the domino effect as seen during Hurricane Sandy in 2012 when the collapse of a power supply system hindered rescue efforts due to the heavy reliance on ICT in USA. Kadri agues that the increased interdependence of different infrastructure sectors resulted in a dangerous vulnerability of the national system as a whole to disasters. Without resilient critical infrastructure to support social media, users are also unable to be utilize it as an effective tool (Kadri, Birregah & Châtelet, 2014). Social media is hence irrelevant without functional critical infrastructure to support it as a disaster recovery tool.

Conclusion

While social media at present cannot be deemed as a satisfactorily effective disaster recovery tool, it does hold much potential which can be fully realized through the implementation of an official framework for post-disaster information dissemination which can help sieve out inaccurate information. Future technological advancements may also lead to the increased battery life of mobile computing devices which will edify social media as a recovery tool.

Though social media does offer a short term solution to disaster recovery, often the most effective disaster recovery plans involve more long-term solutions such as educating people on post-disaster management. Each natural disaster presents its own unique set of problems to different countries, making it impossible to provide a cure-all solution. Governments must step up to evaluate the situation and take appropriate action with the tools available to them in order to mitigate natural disasters effectively.

References:

Adams, V. (2013). Markets of sorrow, labors of faith. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

Allaire, M. (2016). Disaster loss and social media: Can online information increase flood resilience?. Water Resources Research, 52(9), 7408-7423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2016wr019243

Kadri, F., Birregah, B., & Châtelet, E. (2014). The Impact of Natural Disasters on Critical Infrastructures: A Domino Effect-based Study. Journal Of Homeland Security And Emergency Management, 0(0). http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2012-0077

Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008). Digital Inequality: Differences in Young Adults’ Use of the Internet. Communication Research, 35(5), 602-621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650208321782

Houston, J., Hawthorne, J., Perreault, M., Park, E., Goldstein Hode, M., & Halliwell, M. et al. (2014). Social media and disasters: a functional framework for social media use in disaster planning, response, and research. Disasters, 39(1), 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/disa.12092

Huang, C., Chan, E., & Hyder, A. (2010). Web 2.0 and Internet Social Networking: A New tool for Disaster Management? - Lessons from Taiwan. BMC Medical Informatics And Decision Making, 10(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-10-57

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. (2013). World Disasters Report: Focus on technology and the future of humanitarian action.

Kaigo, M. (2012). Social Media Usage During Disasters and Social Capital: Twitter and the Great East Japan Earthquake. Keio Communication Review, (34).

Laituri, M., & Kodrich, K. (2008). On Line Disaster Response Community: People as Sensors of High Magnitude Disasters Using Internet GIS. Sensors, 8(5), 3037-3055. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s8053037

Madianou, M. (2015). Digital Inequality and Second-Order Disasters: Social Media in the Typhoon Haiyan Recovery. Social Media Society

Obar, J., & Wildman, S. (2015). Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 745-750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2015.07.014

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2001. Understanding The Digital Divide

Shklovski, I., Burke, M., Kiesler, S., & Kraut, R. (2010). Technology Adoption and Use in the Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(8), 1228-1246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764209356252

The World Bank (2010). The World Bank Annual Report

Tomer, S., Goldberg, A., & Adini, B. (2015). Socializing in emergencies—A review of the use of social media in emergency situations. International Journal Of Information Management, 35(5), 609-619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.07.001

We are Global (2017) Digital in 2017: Global Overview. (n.d.) from https://wearesocial.com/special-reports/digital-in-2017-global-overview

"Access to new media has empowered individuals, but weakened establishments." Is this a fair statement?

“The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the mind of the masses.” As writer Malcolm X so put, the media plays an incredibly influential role in society and thus whoever controls the media can easily manipulate society. In 2011, this stupendous amount of power and influence was held by a mere 232 executives from six media giants which controlled 90% of American media. However with the advent and rapid growth of new media, this power has since been steadily weakened and spread more evenly among the masses.

New media has led to the rise of a new source of information - social media. People now make use of platforms such as blogs, Twitter and Facebook to share information and news as quickly as possible. News is being reported within the hour by individual journalists who have minimal budget and corporate backing. The fast pace of social reporting has undermined the power of traditional news establishments such as newspapers and TV channels as they are unable to catch up with social media. Moreover, social media also polices the news reported by these traditional news establishments, ensuring that the news reported is truly objective and not biased towards any one party as shown in the fall of prominent media figure Dan Rather who was brought down by bloggers when they found out that he was planning to release fraudulent news. This clearly shows how social media has shifted the power balance between traditional news establishments and the individual by weakening traditional news establishments.

Groundbreaking art can also be shared using new media and thus weakening the tremendous influence held by traditional art institutions. People can now publish their works via new media instead of art galleries and exhibitions. This allows the art scene to be more diverse and also largely removes the financial aspect of publication. The limits previously set on the art scene hindered people who were poor or did not conform to social norms such as transgender people. Since traditional art institutions had a major say in the kind of art displayed and published, the art created by the poor and the minorities were largely filtered out, resulting in a highly elitist art scene in which only the rich and privileged could participate. New media has greatly eroded the power of such art institutions, allowing people to showcase their art to a global audience easily without having to go through these institutions. Writers are now able to self-publish for a small fee on Amazon Kindle, bypassing corporate publishers and artists can now simply upload their art onto social media and even receive feedback from other artists regardless of location. As such, new media has indeed undeniably undermined the power of traditional art establishments and corporations.

Social movements are able to reach a global audience through new media as well, thus creating a greater impact on society. People are able to find out about social injustices and oppression of others by establishments such as a corrupt government or even transnational corporations and hence pressure these establishments into action to rectify the situation as is seen in the case of the Nike sweatshops. Also social media has made it much easier for such social movements to be organised on a global scale, especially the feminist movement. The Everyday Sexism Project started by Laura Bates on Twitter demonstrated this perfectly. Women were able to share stories of the discrimination they faced in their everyday life and thus garnered global attention to the systemic oppression women faced by society, empowering women everywhere. Social media, as such, acts as a form of policing of establishments, placing restrictions on them.

Despite all the benefits and empowerment new media has brought to the individual, it is not necessarily correct to say that the statement is entirely fair.

New media is still being controlled by corporations such as Google. Though it is true that new media is comparatively unrestricted as compared to traditional media, it is still under the control of such corporations. Google, for instance, is a new media juggernaut. It not only controls one of, if not, the world’s greatest search engine but also several social media platforms such as Youtube. These forms of new media have so ingrained themselves into our lives, making Google an undeniable influence in our society now. Thus it is more than apparent that new media does not weaken establishments but rather grants them even more power over us as a society.

New media can still be censored by governments and corporations. While one cannot deny the leaps and bounds taken by technology especially in terms of social media, the same can arguably be said for censorship technology. Governments are legislating cyber activities nowadays so as to regulate the online community. In Singapore, bloggers such as Gan Huai Shi have been charged under the Sedition Act and fined or even jailed. As new media grows and evolves, censorship methods have not been in a state of stagnation either, evolving as well to better achieve the aims of the government or corporations. Hence it is clear that new media does not empower individuals.

While it is true that new media grants the masses a voice, one must remember that behind this burgeoning media giant, there are also several corporations which still influence the content we receive every day and perhaps, regardless of future developments in the media industry, there will always be a corporate presence. Despite so, it is undeniable that new media has indeed made media a two-way street and as such, the masses now can also influence establishments as they do us.