Emerging Media Blog

Jessie Gabor's blog for Dr. Lance Porter's MC 7019 Class

[jessiegab-blog1]

Final Blog Post

This week’s readings tackled a lot of new technologies, such as facial recognition, touchscreens, the Apple watch, and AR (augmented reality). All of the articles talk about their respective subject, but I noticed a slight similarity of all of the readings – the author’s caution to these new technologies. Each author went through pros and cons of each technology, but they also wrote in detail about how these technologies are changing the way we live day-by-day. Wilmott and Fraser note in their article that, “we want technology to work for us, but we are actually working for it.” This powerful statement resonated with me as I checked my Apple Watch for any new notifications. It’s true, we will naturally be skeptical of change and new technology that comes our way. The way I see it, this technology is coming for us whether we like it or not. We might as well enjoy the benefits of it and stop worrying about the “what ifs.” As Parisi put it, there’s not much we can do to stop the growth of technology.

As I was reading through each of the articles, they constantly reminded me of one of my favorite shows – Black Mirror. I’m sure all of the authors of this week’s readings love Black Mirror, as it’s all about technology and the sinister paths it could potentially take in the future. I was particularly reminded of the episode, “Nosedive,” which features all four of the technology’s talked about in this week’s readings.  This episode focuses on how obsessed society is with technology and how much society has changed to adjust. Black Mirror features technology like implanted chips, AR, and tons of other advanced technology that honestly doesn’t seem very far off.  It can all be very daunting, but you begin to realize that technology is heading in this direction of advancement. New technology is being created everyday by major tech companies, and the government is also latching onto it.

Becoming aware of how technology works, especially social media, has helped me be more aware of how often I’m on my device verses how often I want to be on my device. Learning about new media in this course has helped, in my opinion, give me more control of my information, my time, and my money.  Unplugging can be liberating, but not realistic for how fast-paced our society is now. The readings for this week made me realize how far humans are able to take technology and the potential of what it can become. Technology can be good or evil, depending at the perspective you take on it. I choose to focus on the good, and focus more on the positives that technology continues to bring into my life.

I’m looking forward to discussing AR and touchscreens in class since these are a couple of topics we haven’t yet discussed in detail. I’m curious to hear other people’s takes on the rapid pace technology is taking and how we, as a society, will adjust to it in the future.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week 10 Blog Post

Infinite Distraction was all about the actual distractions that take place in our lives today – namely the internet and social media. Pettman’s witty writing made the book easy to read and almost a small distraction from daily lives. Witty chapter titles like “Chasing the Unicorn” or “Slaves to the Algorithm” kept me on my toes. “Slaves to the Algorithm” particularly hit home with me. Pettman constantly makes the point of how much power Google, Apple, and Facebook all have over not only our data, but the way we live day by day. Pettman asks in his book, “What happens to a world in which distraction becomes the rule rather than an exception?” In today’s world, it’s common for us to be on our phones even in the presence of our friends. In class, when Dr. Porter calls for a 15-minute break, half of the class leaves the room and the other half takes a phone break instead (myself included). I almost feel like I need the distraction of my phone to keep me occupied in moments I have free time.

Pettman mentioned how much time we spend on these “distractions” and I became very curious about my own use. I downloaded the app Moment that tracks how much time you are on your phone. It asks to track your screen time and location, which I wasn’t sure about, but for the sake of curiosity, I agreed to the terms. The app tracks how many times you pick up your phone and how much time you spend on it a day. The amount of time spent on my phone were hours – which was not surprising. The number that surprised me was how many times I picked up my phone and put it down in a day – solely looking for some type of distraction. This experiment I tried on myself (which was quite a distraction from other things I should’ve been working on over spring break) proved many of Pettman’s notions throughout his book. After finishing the book, I started to consciously notice how often I was picking up my phone out of boredom. Four hours of my typical day was spent on my phone mindlessly scrolling through various social media sites. This is the new norm. This is the world that we live in now, a life full of distractions. Netflix, another guilty pleasure, takes up many people’s lives on a daily basis. Pettman accepts distraction as a central principle of our media environment and notes how this will continue to shape our lives. The need for constant entertainment in our lives will continue to persist parallel to the world wide web.  

I’d love to talk about life before smart phones in class – something most in our class remember very vaguely, if at all.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week 9 Blog Post

 Adrienne Massanari’s Participatory Culture, Community, and Play: Learning from Reddit is a “digital ethnography” of Reddit. Massanari takes a look at the complexity of the site, and labels it as a “community platform.” Massanari accurately describes reddit culture as nerdy and playful while also highlighting the history of reddit. Since Reddit has recently exploded, as seen from the graph above, I found Massanari’s descriptions of reddit spot on. I use to normally visit Reddit in high school when reading, gaming, or looking up general trending topics. Massanari showcases her in-depth research in easy to understand language. As Massanari puts it, “By documenting how reddit culture exists now, this book also argues for the importance of preserving the nuances of interactions in these spaces as they occur, as global culture is increasingly lived in and enacted through them.”

 Although I don’t normally engage in Reddit these days, the book inspired me to take a look. I use to be heavily involved in Reddit culture back in high school when I played video games. The site provided tons of cheats and walkthroughs of popular video games. As I believe every platform these days have a “culture,” Massanari made me very curious about the current Reddit culture. 

Since I watched SNL last night, I decided to search, “Pete Davidson” on Reddit. He gave a somewhat controversial monologue on mental health and I wanted to see what the Reddit community thought about this topic. I was honestly disgusted and mortified by the comments. I originally wanted to post a screenshot of the subreddits I found, but decided against it because of all of the negativity. These were definitely trollers who not only thought Pete Davidson was horrible, but that he deserved to die. There were misogynistic comments about his girlfriend, homophobic comments about Pete Davidson’s views on transgender people, and even users who were actively engaging in ways he could kill himself. By searching something so simple, I found a terrible and dark part of Reddit almost instantly. It made me think of the “outsiders” Massanari described in her book. Here is the link to the Pete Davidson search. As a big fan of Pete Davidson, please read through the comments with caution, as some of these comments made my stomach turn. This plays on the idea of being anonymous online as we’ve talked about in class before. I can almost guarantee that none of these comments would be made by these people if their real names were involved. Maybe I’m just really sensitive and like to stay on the nicer side of the internet, but these comments involving a real person left me feeling very uncomfortable. I decided to search other SNL cast members to see if the conversations were just as negative – unfortunately they were.

 I didn’t want to give up on Reddit. I decided to search mental health, and found a subreddit that was a safe space for people suffering with mental health issues. The conversation was completely opposite from what I had previously read. There were great stories, encouragement and advice. A couple of the stories even made me tear up, and gave me some new found faith in the Reddit community. I’m excited to discuss both the dark and the light sides of Reddit in class on Wednesday.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week 8 Blog Post

This week’s readings focused on the hybrid media known as second screening. In the fast paced technology driven world we live in today, one screen is just not enough. Often times, like this past weekend, I found myself watching Saturday Night Live while also scrolling through the infinite social media feeds. Since I had just read this week’s articles, I realized how many skits I missed because I was engaged on my iPhone. It made me question how much I miss because of second screening. I was watching SNL with my two roommates. When I looked up to see what my roommates were doing, they were both completely involved on their iPhones. They were missing just as much as I was.  Zúñiga, Garcia-Perdomo, and McGregor note in their article that, “multiple tasks can be processed effectively in parallel so long as they do not use the same brain resource (Wickens, 2002) (e.g., listening to music and reading a newspaper).” They also note that, “the cognitive cost of second screening may manifest in difficulties with factual recall and news comprehension.” So often, we are disengaged with people because we are constantly connecting on our devises, it’s interesting to realize that we are also often disengaging from one screen for another. This makes me question the long-term implications of second screening and how it will affect future generations. In fact, Kazacova’s research finds that media multitasking behavior may substantially alter the way media viewers process media content.

Although my recent experience seemed negative, second screening can be very beneficial to the viewer. As I talked about last week, when watching my guilty pleasure, The Bachelor, I always look forward to following the #BachelorNation on Twitter, which is filled with hilarious memes and commentary on the show throughout. The Bachelor is such a ridiculous show, as many viewers know, but when second screening, it brings the entertainment to a whole different level. 

This can be related to Williams and Gonlin’s research concerning How to Get Away with Murder and second screening. According to the article, second screening has benefitted engagers by having, “positive reactions to representations of a generally marginalized type of Black femininity in HTGAWM.” Williams and Gonlin highlights the importance of having these conversations online. McGregor also finds similar results when it comes to political engagement due to second screening.

The readings also dive in to the political effect that second screening has. McGregor researches second screening in relation to online participation – which overall positively impacts political participation. However, when individuals disagree with the messaging, it can lead to political disengagement, as seen with Trump during the 2016 Presidential election. Zúñiga and Liu also looks into political effects when it comes to voting habits, but found no difference in voting patterns between second screen users.

The readings gave a great look at the way people use technology today and how it will continue to progress. The way we consume news and media is continuously changing. I can think of multiple instances when I watch TV, do homework, and scroll through feeds on my iPhone. In fact, almost everyone I know is guilty of this. How will this affect the way people continue to communicate with each other in the future? Also, how will this affect media and news consumption going forward?

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week 7 Blog Post

Updating to Remain the Same recognizes the, “wonderful creepiness of new media” throughout the book, emphasizing on three different models of events: information, crisis and catastrophe. Chun also highlights the importance of habits, and how they shape our environment, both online and off. Chun looks at the importance of updating, saying that if you aren’t constantly updating or changing, and you’ll eventually cease to exist. This also relates to Big Data. Chun notes how it’s human nature to, “wait for the next big thing.” This can apply easily in our personal lives and on our lives online as we wait anxiously for the next Twitter or Snapchat update. Chun gives the very simple equation when unfolding one of her main points of the book: Habit + Crisis = Update.

This book was very philosophical when looking at Big Data, which I appreciated. Many of the concepts discussed in this book not only related to the internet, but to one’s own personal life. In particular, Chun notes that crises are opportunities for habit change. This could be true in one’s life, a business, or an online platform. Chun also cites Milton Friedman with the idea that constant update deprives habit of its ability to habituate. “As soon one is comfortable,” Chun writes, “habits are disrupted, so that one is always dependent on and responsive to the environment.” This can easily be taken from a programming perspective or a personal light.

Chun also tackles privacy in another important sections of the book. One of the most powerful examples Chun uses is Steubenville. This terrifying situation brought light to the fact that the two boys involved in the case – who both used their true identity online – got one year in juvenile while the Anonymous hacker who leaked these files could face up to ten years in prison for his involvement in this case. Chun calls to question the clean separation of publicity from privacy. Randi Zuckerberg, marketing director of Facebook, argued in 2011 that, “people behave a lot better when they have their real name down.” Yet, much of the cyber bullying that happens online is often associated with one’s actual account. This brings up Chun’s point, that privacy is being secreted everywhere. Privacy can’t and won’t stop “bad” users of the internet. This also made me question the court’s role in cyberbullying and rape cases that are born online.

Overall, I loved this book and especially the way it was written. Beautiful and eloquent language was used throughout that was so easy to interpret. I was impressed with Chun’s ability to describe so many heavy topics in easy-to-read language and tables throughout the text.  I loved the connections Chun used with philosophy, literature, and psychology – all related back to the way we use and adapt to cyberspace. Chun’s examination of implicit and explicit memory in relation to Big Data was noteworthy and worth discussing in class. Exploring the relationship between media, crisis and habit formation in the first part of the book was applicable to ideas both in and out of the classroom.  At the end of the book, Chun gives the reader a task: to try to inhabit the inhabitable, to give in excess and in advance, so that we can re-member differently. This was by far one of my favorite things we’ve read so far, and I can’t wait to discuss in class.

Topics worth discussing in class: Snowden, relationship between habit and crisis, the shaming community online

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week 6 Blog Post

This week’s readings focused on the psychology behind behavior of individuals and brands online. Carah uses music festivals to study the way companies promote their products. According to Heineken’s ad agency director Amir Kassaei, “Marketing is not about content, but the management of infrastructure.” The article gives examples of brands using bloggers, influencers, and social media contests to persuade consumers to post about their company online. As an avid music festival goer, this is seen at every single music festival I attend. One example of this was at Hangout Music Fest in Gulf Shores, Swisher Sweets had a promotional tent set up. Every picture you took in front of their Swisher Sweets sign gave you a chance to win free merch such as T-shirts mugs, etc. Carah explores how companies are beginning to focus more on products that are likely to get posted. Companies are focusing more on the “aesthetic” of their product so it will get more online attention. Personally, I believe this is one of the most useful marketing strategies to target young consumers.  Carah also mentions, “Corporate appropriation” of authentic culture. I loved this term because I think it describes “hip” companies so well. As Carah notes, brands are becoming more social and less symbolic, meaning brands like Swisher Sweets are much more likely to adapt the “festival vibe” to attract younger consumers.

Waddell checks out how negative social media commentary affects consumers’ responses to TV shows. The MAIN model theorizes that user comments affect users’ perceptions of content through the bandwagon heuristic. Waddell finds that negative comments influence consumer’s perceptions of a show. The perfect example of this is the newest season of The Bachelor (Yes, I watch this reality TV trash for pure entertainment, please don’t think less of me). This season has been very boring in comparison to past seasons, however, every Monday evening my roommates and I scroll through the #TheBachelor twitter during the show for tons of entertainment. The negative comments towards the show are not only hilarious, but offer tons of commentary between #BachelorNation fans that can change our opinions of contestants. (If I know my perception is changing based on social media, it’s okay, right?)

Neubaum dives into people’s fear of isolation. Neubaum goes in depth about social protection theory and silence theory (both worth discussing in class) Neubaum‘s research suggests that human ability enables individuals to continuously observe their social environment by using their quasi-statistical sense. Humans, especially online, tend to form opinions that others in their network agree with. This can be seen daily by your crazy aunt or uncle on Facebook.

Gvirsman repeatedly makes me think about the habits of our current President as she researches audience homophily and selective exposure. Gvirsman points out that being selective on how you consume politics can strengthens one political identity. Media websites cater to a homogenous, like minded group who have needs of self-consistency, according to Gvirsman. There is no better example of this than Trump’s tweets that constantly attribute Fox News… sometimes at 3 a.m.

Kleemans tackles, in my opinion, one of the most essential pieces of research when she explores media influence on body image by adolescent girls. The results, not surprisingly, found that photo shopped images on Instagram affect girl’s body image negatively. The research also finds that young girls often compare themselves to peers on Instagram. This is an important topic because although I didn’t grow up with Instagram, I resonate with the results of this study personally. Too often, I’ve found myself comparing my experiences with others on Instagram, knowing fully that these pictures and experiences have been altered to get more likes and comments. I find myself to also fall into this trend, which isn’t a good thing. I can only imagine the long term psychological impact this will have for young girls who have grown up with Instagram.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week 5 Blog Post

Understanding the role social media plays in everyday life is essential for both communication professionals and your average social media user. This week’s readings explored the impact social media has made in several ways and various fields. Using both quantitative and qualitative data, the readings examined trends on Twitter and Facebook to find various conclusions about the way people use social media and how it impacts everyday life.

Of the readings, my favorite was Penney’s examination of the Bernie Sanders campaign along with the “official” vs. “unofficially” digital campaign. Penney describes Sander’s campaign a, “social media success story” as Sander’s gained a ton of attraction from younger Twitter users during the 2016 Presidential election. Penney examined official and unofficial groups such as “Bernie Sanders Dank Meme Stash” (a Facebook group I’m still a part of) to track the level of attention from each group. Penney looks at the grassroots campaign and how Sander’s support soared as he gained momentum online. Although he didn’t win the election, Sander’s undoubtedly made a mark during the beginning of election season. Social media users became more obsessed with the memes and the trending “political revolution” than with Sander’s actual proposed policies. Penney notes that this political fan culture has shifted the way politics will be handled in the future. This has been proved with Donald Trump’s victory and will continue to be proven during future election cycles.

 Lu touches on the social impact posting Facebook statues have on an individual. Lu found that people who post more frequently on Facebook have more “perceived support.” The text notes this is all about the “awareness of other’s awareness” that can directly relate to somebody feeling emotionally supported. I believe this concept also spreads to Twitter and viral tweets. There’s an overwhelming sense of accomplishment if you post something that gains a lot of attention. This can totally change the way we perceive others and ourselves. It can even impact the way we receive news.

 Grosheck explores journalist’s roles on Twitter as media gatekeepers. Groshek finds that journalists were not the most influential on Twitter in terms of generating discussion when it came to Ferguson. I’d be willing to bet this also applies with almost every major news outbreak. The recent Florida school shooting has sparked discussion about gun control on Twitter, and many of the tweets pertaining to this matter are not from journalists or media gatekeepers, but instead your average everyday user.

 Social media has proved time and time again that it is more than capable of changing the conversation or starting a new one. To me, the readings seemed to steer in a direction on determining the key to social media – or how one could potentially predict what goes viral. Is there a way to determine this? How much have social factors offline contributed to what goes viral online? We talked about viral posts in one of our last class period if there was a method on making a post or subject go viral. Truthfully, I think it’s is completely random, and there’s honestly no measurable way to determine what Twitter users will latch on to. Shin notes the spread of false rumors on Twitter in his article, and stresses the importance of solving this problem. This is another example of how viral posts can gain tons of attention – no matter if it’s accurate.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week Four Blog Post

Affective Publics is about technology and how it continues to shape our society and social norms. The book focused on Twitter and how it continues to invoke “connection” between users. The book also discusses how Twitter has invoked civic engagement. One of the more interesting parts of the book discusses story telling on Twitter and how it’s used to communicate with one’s network.

Twitter and other platforms offer two-way communication, which allows for us to talk to people about literally any topic. Papacharissi also notes that Twitter allows individuals to feel a sense of participation when it comes to politics, which I agree with. In many cases, I believe Twitter is helpful for people to be informed and feel like they are causing change or conversation. Without Twitter, I think many people probably wouldn’t be as aware when it comes to politics. However, it is also a way that can potentially spread false news, as we saw during the 2016 Presidential election.

Papacharissi notes that we should be examining, “particular varieties of narratives that facilitate deeper understanding of issues—for example slow- versus fast-paced news narratives and varieties of literacies that help us generate deeper readings and meaning-making of the many structures of feelings populating our everyday world.” I thought this was impactful to note because of her mention of slow verses fast paces news narratives. How does the pace of news affect the way it is received? Does it depend on the topic or completely on trends? 

Twitter allows people to feel more engaged. As we talked about last week, does political engagement lead to political action offline? In many cases, I believe yes, but I think the book also makes the point that you are able to make change and involve action online. Papacharissi also examines hashtags and trending topics in an attempt to understand how these trending topics affect public opinion.

One question I had while reading is how Twitter will continue to start conversations and impact the United States’ political sphere. In the past, people formed public opinion from what they heard on the news and perhaps what their friends and neighbors had to say about a particular topic. In today’s world, public opinion seems to be heavily influenced by social media and trending topics. Will this continue to affect public opinion in a positive or negative light going forward? Social media allows for us to become more informed and continues to impact our political sphere. Examples like Arab Springs shows the prevalence of social media and the impact that this new way of communication motivates political action.

Another interesting point I thought of when reading Papacharissi’s work was the impact of storytelling on Twitter. Discussing this in class would be helpful as it was difficult for me to completely understand this concept. Paoacharissi notes the importance of storytelling and how it can impact political awareness and action, however I’d like to try to understand how to differentiate between storytelling and simply tweeting “aimlessly.” Can storytelling also impact other nonpolitical aspects of Twitter? I look forward to discussing these ideas more in class.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week Three Blog Post

This week’s readings focused on the digital inequalities that come with emerging media. Before the readings, I had truthfully never thought about the inevitable inequalities that media bring. The readings pointed to the same conclusion – that those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to be online and create content.

Many of the readings discuss the fact that people who are lower class may not be able to afford personal computers, smart phones, tablets, etc. that would allow them to have more content production. Schradie argues this by saying that getting online does not automatically lead to content production. Schradie also challenges the idea that the internet has “created an egalitarian public sphere with voices representative of the general public.”

The educational gap in online users also plays an effect on how users behave online. Hoffmann found in his research that, “highly educated users are less interested in online interactions, especially for social or entertainment purposes. This effect holds even though highly educated users report higher self-efficacy, which generally drives content production on the Internet.” This was an interesting point made that differentiated the middle – upper class behavior online. Hoffmann also finds that younger, less educated people are typically the ones most likely to create content online. I couldn’t help but wonder if this was because those users simply aren’t old enough to have the education level of some of the older web users.

Sasaki provided powerful insight about political empowerment in my favorite reading of the week. Over the 2016 election cycle, I believe the results from Sasaki was proven time and time again on social media. Many people that I knew personally felt much more politically aware and engaged because they got much of their political updates solely from social media. This has proven to be dangerous to less educated people online, especially because of the fake news epidemic that plagued this past election cycle. This reading made me question the future of politics and social media, and how the less educated people in the U.S. will influence or be influenced by online interaction.

Overall, the readings this week was another wake up call for me. The research findings were strong in each piece and the literature reviews – especially those about digital divides – were very helpful to gain a better understanding of the clear issues of inequality online. The research in many of the readings were difficult for me to completely understand at first, but once I did, the results were very strong. I appreciated that some of the research was conducted outside of the U.S. as I believe it’s very important to research internet trends in other parts of the world. I would be very interested to see research of internet use in eastern parts of the world.

I believe that since the younger generation has grown up with social media and the internet, the type of content being created will of course be different than those who are older – regardless of education level. Research in this area will need to continue often as these trends will continue to change. Many see the internet as a form of freedom to express oneself and an idea of true democracy. The research from this week has shown it is not that simple, and the internet has indeed created a divide among many users.

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week Two Blog Post

Personal Connection in the Digitial Age by Nancy Baym dives into the role of digital media in personal relationships. I especially enjoyed this read because throughout the book, Baym doesn’t seem to choose a side to argue on when it comes to digital media, rather she explores perspectives of this by using theories and examples. One of the main subjects that stood out for me was Baym’s take on social cues in chapter three. Baym points out that the use of digital media has allowed new ways for users to represent and use social cues in ways that were never available before. Although a survey she conducted found that people preferred face-to-face communication, Baym notes the utopian view that, “media with social cues may lead to shallow interaction and relationships.”

 In the last two chapters, Baym explores dyadic relationships and goes into the way people portray themselves online. In today’s society, many people create a persona or “look” for their social media accounts. For example, somebody may post to their Snapchat story only when they are doing something exciting, fun, or interesting, making the viewers believe this person may have an exciting life. However, when the same person is completing everyday tasks or has a boring day, no story is posted. Many people do this, including myself, which can change somebody’s perception of a certain person. I’d be interested to see if there is some physiological explanation to peoples extended use of social media.

 Baym also makes the interesting point that although there is plenty of room to lie about one’s identity on the internet, many people don’t because of the absence of social cues online. Baym notes that reduced cues online removes social pressure, making people less likely to lie online than one would think. I personally believe that although people may not lie online, they definitely skew their appearance online to benefit themselves. People who use social media heavily understand how easy it is to shape one’s view of themselves from an outsider perspective.

 Overall, I enjoyed Baym’s different perspectives on digital media. The examples, studies, and theories used in the book flowed well together and was all very complimentary of each other. The book made me think of social cues and the importance of understanding these social cues online. In 2018, personal relationships happen online all of the time. Dating apps, social media, and online chat rooms allow us to meet new people and portray ourselves the way we want to be portrayed – and possibly lead to long lasting intimate relationships. As technology continues to grow and advance, social norms both online and off continue to change. One topic I’d love to discuss in class is how the advancement of technology has changed the way we communicate with each other face-to-face. Often, you see people would rather look on their phone and communicate through their specific social network rather than have a conversation with a stranger in person.  Has technology caused us to not have as meaningful of encounters in person, or has it done just the opposite?

[jessiegab-blog1]

Week One Blog Post

      The readings from this week make clear both the importance of research when dealing with SNS’s and the difficulty that comes with gathering accurate research before it becomes obsolete. Ellison and boyd mentioned that all technology evolves over time, making it difficult but necessary to, “identify salient features to report.” Boyd also makes this point in her work when she argues the importance of analyzing the “phenomenon” of social media.

     Boyd provides insightful and in depth interviews with teenagers in order to see how it shaped their life. One of my favorite points made by boyd is, “I can not help but to wonder how many people wrongly think that they can interpret online content without understanding the context in which it is produced.” This made me question the way social media is used today, and how I personally use it at times to gain “first impressions” of people without sometimes ever actually meeting them. Social media has developed greatly and people now develop social media personas and have become very conscious of the content they produce and share to their selected group of friends or followers.

      With all of this being said, Lee, Ho and Lhin expands on the “problematic” side of social media. They dive into social media addiction – which hit way too close to home for me. One thought-provoking part of this reading that stuck out was the relation that high SNS users had with anxiety and depression. This resonated with me because I often associated personally to many of the points that were made in this reading. It seems like almost everybody my age is very in touch with social media and uses it almost constantly. An interesting research topic could be the relation of anxiety and depression in millennials and the overall rising SNS use. Do millennials suffer more from anxiety and depression than people before the social media era? Lee, Ho and Lhin also mention network perspective, meaning people aren’t always as independent as we think simply because they may be invested in different networks to provide social compensation.  This reading in particular was a wakeup call for me in terms of my social media use. Even though this related to me, I don’t feel like I use social media any more than my peers. With that being said, is this a generational addition, and is there anything that can be done to control this addiction? Does it need to be controlled?

     Privacy is also mentioned by Stoycheff and Ellison, both mentioning how difficult it is to research this topic as privacy policies are constantly changing. Stoycheff mentions that although privacy is a research issue, there’s a fair chance that many SNS users don’t understand or take interest into privacy issues. Stoycheff also notes how a vast amount of research is coming exclusively from Facebook, which could become problematic for future research as so many users are moving from this platform to others such as Instagram or Snapchat.

     Overall, I found the readings to be very interesting and especially appreciated the qualitative research insight from boyd and the look into social media addiction by Lee, Ho and Lhin. Although I enjoyed the readings, I found difficulty understanding Context Collapse by Davis and would love to talk more about this in class to gain a better understanding.