You meet
someone, hit it off, become friends on Facebook. You look at all their
pictures, read all their statuses (even “like” a few of them), and listen to
all the songs that they post. Once you meet in person, you get along very well.
One thing feels odd, you already know a lot about each other’s lives because of
the wealth of information Facebook supplies. On the one hand, it’s different to
not get to know someone in person for the first time. At the same time, the two
of you have already made it past the awkward stage and already have a lot to
talk about, so many stories to tell. It cannot be forgotten, though, the fact
that information one learns on Facebook is information written by the person as
part of their online identity, and it’s often a distorted picture.
This person may be a friend, it may
be a potential significant other, or it may just be some weirdo. The point is
everything you know about them at the start is based on how they want to be
viewed, on what they want you to know. This is not wrong in itself on some sort
of moral basis, that is, its breaking from tradition does not make it bad. It
cannot be ignored, however, that the more traditional way of using one’s powers
of observation, rhetoric, and the randomness of unplanned run-ins can teach one
a lot more about a person a lot more quickly than a person’s contrived profile.
Interactions with people may not be as perfect (a person may be sweating
profusely in gym clothing, while the other is hungover with last night’s eyeliner
smudged), but the decision to have that cup of coffee together will definitely
be more interesting than a casual viewing of someone’s latest tagged pictures.
To me, it feels like instead of
hiding behind the identity we have built for ourselves (or has been built of
us) on Facebook, it is important to try our best to show our true selves to
people when we interact with them in person. If possible, to shatter the
preconceived opinion and judgment someone has made of us. Even given this, it
is still important (for social and professional lives) to have a nice profile
on Facebook, one that shows who you are and what you are all about in the best
possible light. This is because nowadays, the first thing any normal person is
going to do when they are deciding whether they want to see you again or hire
you is check out your profile on Facebook. So as contrary as it may seem to characterize
Facebook as “important bullshit”, I think there is something to be said for it.
It means nothing and can tell you very little about a person’s actual character
or story, but its existence is important to put you on the same plane as everyone
else of this generation and in this world.
I think that the readings make some compelling points along these lines. The most important one I believe has to do with this idea of the "true" self as the unmediated, necessarily "discovered" or "found" identity that one encounters or thinks one encounters in face-to-face interaction. If anything, the readings have made a good case for the idea that our identities are networked and as such they do not exist outside of network interactions. As such, the question becomes not "what is the 'true' identity, but rather, "how does the social media representation articulate with the overall identity formation that it contributes to?" I don't think that there can be any "true" identity unless we are dealing with something that doesn't depend on relationality. That is, that is a thing. Since humans are social, identity is dependent on the other(s) one encounters. And representation is complex and always mediated.
ReplyDeleteI love the phrase, "important bullshit."
ReplyDelete