To use social media, especially Facebook, is to perform unpaid data entry work for a major corporation. It is amazing how many people do not understand that this is exactly what they are doing every time they log in and update their profile, post on somebody's wall, etc. They are inputting the information which is the basis for Facebook's revenue stream. They are not users as much as they are employees without paychecks.
Having performed paid data entry for major corporations, I really have no idea why so many people of my generation are so eager to perform such boring, repetitive tasks without any compensation. It really boggles my mind. Data entry is a shit job, sort of the digital equivalent of flipping burgers. I wouldn't dream of doing it for free in my spare time, certainly not for a company like Facebook, certainly not when the data is my own personal information.
Saturday, February 9, 2013
Connection and Fragmentation
One of the paradoxes of contemporary existence in America - I won't say "contemporary life", because by and large life is only found outside of contemporary existence in America - is the interplay between interdependence and alienation, or connection and fragmentation.
On the one hand we are all too aware of how easy it is to "connect" with all manner of people via social media. On Twitter, we can "follow" and even talk to celebrities On Facebook, we can contact classmates from high school, ex girlfriends, some asshole met at a party six months ago - all people who might have been mercifully forgotten in an earlier, less media saturated age.
But none of this "connection" really adds up to meaningful relationships. Studies suggest that the average American has few, if any, people they can confide in. And further studies suggest that the most 'connected' individuals are those who are also the most narcisstic and manipulative. Social media is a platform for aggressive self-promotion, not friendship. The actual experience of life in America is one of pervasive loneliness, and it is a loneliness which is simply exacerbated by online "connection".
As if to provide an inverted mirror image of American social life, the dominant American political ideology also tells us that we are on our own. It trumpets the achievement of the individual while subliminally telling us that the world is a dangerous place and that we cannot trust other people. Our public intellectuals proclaim that human beings are selfish, calculating creatures out to maximize their own benefits; that only through the Market and the State can these selfish urges be sublimated or repressed, respectively. Ideology affirms the experience of contemporary existence: you are on your own.
Yet the system which the political ideology supports only functions because of the reality of interdependence - in economic terms, globalization. If my sweater was made in Bangladesh, the asparagus I had for dinner was from Peru, the car I drive made in Japan - are we really then "on our own"? Does an ontology of fragmented individuals make sense, if those individuals all depend upon one another in myriad ways? Or is it not the case that the system only works at all because of the reality it tries to deny - the reality of interdependence?
To summarize this paradox:
Socially, we are told we are all connected, yet our experience is one of alienation and loneliness.
Politically, we are told we are all isolated individuals, yet the system only functions because of interdependence and connection.
The interdependence of the global economy, of course, is rather different from the connection of genuine community. There is a tendency in much liberal discourse (or what passes for discourse among liberals) to fetishize how "we are all interconnected" as a warm and fuzzy basis for social action. Yet the interdependence of the globalized economy is a web of oppression, one that results in job losses at home and exploitation of workers abroad for the enrichment of a few corporate executives. Likewise, digital connections cannot really substitute for meaningful social relations. All connections, it would seem, are not equal. They can often be the basis of exploitation and the cause of much suffering.
On the one hand we are all too aware of how easy it is to "connect" with all manner of people via social media. On Twitter, we can "follow" and even talk to celebrities On Facebook, we can contact classmates from high school, ex girlfriends, some asshole met at a party six months ago - all people who might have been mercifully forgotten in an earlier, less media saturated age.
But none of this "connection" really adds up to meaningful relationships. Studies suggest that the average American has few, if any, people they can confide in. And further studies suggest that the most 'connected' individuals are those who are also the most narcisstic and manipulative. Social media is a platform for aggressive self-promotion, not friendship. The actual experience of life in America is one of pervasive loneliness, and it is a loneliness which is simply exacerbated by online "connection".
As if to provide an inverted mirror image of American social life, the dominant American political ideology also tells us that we are on our own. It trumpets the achievement of the individual while subliminally telling us that the world is a dangerous place and that we cannot trust other people. Our public intellectuals proclaim that human beings are selfish, calculating creatures out to maximize their own benefits; that only through the Market and the State can these selfish urges be sublimated or repressed, respectively. Ideology affirms the experience of contemporary existence: you are on your own.
Yet the system which the political ideology supports only functions because of the reality of interdependence - in economic terms, globalization. If my sweater was made in Bangladesh, the asparagus I had for dinner was from Peru, the car I drive made in Japan - are we really then "on our own"? Does an ontology of fragmented individuals make sense, if those individuals all depend upon one another in myriad ways? Or is it not the case that the system only works at all because of the reality it tries to deny - the reality of interdependence?
To summarize this paradox:
Socially, we are told we are all connected, yet our experience is one of alienation and loneliness.
Politically, we are told we are all isolated individuals, yet the system only functions because of interdependence and connection.
The interdependence of the global economy, of course, is rather different from the connection of genuine community. There is a tendency in much liberal discourse (or what passes for discourse among liberals) to fetishize how "we are all interconnected" as a warm and fuzzy basis for social action. Yet the interdependence of the globalized economy is a web of oppression, one that results in job losses at home and exploitation of workers abroad for the enrichment of a few corporate executives. Likewise, digital connections cannot really substitute for meaningful social relations. All connections, it would seem, are not equal. They can often be the basis of exploitation and the cause of much suffering.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)