Facebook, and the ego.
Social networking sites create a mappable landscape in which
a person’s ego can henceforth be mapped. One would presume that a status update
is truthful in accordance with the poster’s perspective, which may or may not
be agreeable to others. Since the truth is ‘awful slippery’ (Wood, Kaiser &
Abramms, 2006), one would expect disagreements to occur. ‘Social networking is about
everyone’ (Weaver, 2008) or specifically, one’s ego as you can map out a person’s
ego just as easily as you can map out their lives. A “happy” update caters to
those who want others to know that they are “happy” and to have the feeling
reciprocated back to them by their friends. “Sad” or “depressing” updates are
cries for people to feel bad for them and make them feel batter. When we are
mentioned positively in another’s comment we generally feel better about ourselves.
Negative comments or the lack of inclusion within comments generally incites
damage to one’s ego and starts conflict.
I
was stuck in an in-house fight between family members started by the comment of
“be good for mum” to one of my contacts. Her step-father was not impressed by
the fact that he was not mentioned in this comment and retaliated, with it
eventually being blown out of proportion. He was also objective to being called by his
full name, and because his ego couldn’t handle it, he decided to make a nasty
comment on Facebook, rather than discuss it.
A person’s
reflection on their life is created by their ego, and the map generated by a
social networking site is more accurate when compared to a person’s ego than
that of their actual life. Since social networking ‘connect(s) people virtually’
(Schwabel 2009), issues, not normally discussed in a natural environment, are
raised.
Dan
Schawbel 2009 Me
2.0 p. 143
Weaver, A.C., (2008). Social Networking. Computer. 2 (1/1), pp.97-100
Wood, Kaiser & Abramms, (2006). 'Chapter One'. In: (ed
3), Seeing Through Maps: Many Ways to See the
World. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK
Your analysis of Facebook as an emotional outlet is a very intriguing notion, one that I had not previously addressed. Examining Facebook using this concept offers a lot of supporting evidence for your conclusion. Life on the Screen: Identity in the age of the internet address a similar issue through the discussion of how the internet has altered the perception of self-identity (Turkle, 1995). Have you considered that perhaps the reason for this new use of Facebook is the lack of emotion outlet in modern society? It is an interesting idea that even though the mission of Facebook is to connect people it leaves us isolated.
ReplyDeleteTurkle, S. (1995). Panopticon, in Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet (pp. 246-149).
Facebook can be used to express people’s feelings either in a positive way or in a negative way. Many use this site to boast about what they have in an almost flamboyant way and it makes me wonder if their posts are true and accurate or if they are trying to impress other readers. Some people post comments about their own feelings; happy to let their friends know their deepest of feelings, whether they be negative or depressive. It makes me wonder if these people are attention seekers and are eagerly waiting for a friend to like or comment on their status update. However, these people are creating their own ‘space’ and ‘place’ on their Facebook wall and are forming their own identity, and Tuan has stated “We have privileged access to states of mind, thoughts and feelings” (Tuan 1977).
ReplyDeleteReference
Tuan, Y. (1977). Introduction, in Space and Place: The perspective of experience
(pp. 3-7). London, England: Edward Arnold.