Communications Question

Student Learning Outcomes for COM 510:

– Identify the distinctive scholarly approaches to the study of communication and media technologies.(SLO 1.1)

– Evaluate the historical impact of media technologies on individuals, societies and cultures.(SLOs 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3)

– Apply theories to the study of communication and media technologies. (SLO 1.3)

– Critically analyze the relationship between media content and media technology. (SLOs 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3)

– Examine the impact of new media technologies on interpersonal and intercultural communication. (SLO 5.3)

– Write a scholarly self-guided research paper. (SLOs 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3)

– Present your research to a scholarly audience. (SLOs 5.1 and 5.2)

– Evaluate the aesthetic, ethical, psychological, cultural, political dimensions of media technologies. (SLOs 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3)

Critical Assignment: Students will compose a 10-12 page research paper providing a detailed analysis of a media technology within a communication area of their choice (journalism, Television, social media, cyber communication, etc.,).  Students will select a communication area on which a substantial body of work has already been published to allow for academic research.  While students are expected to display knowledge of the media technology setting under study, they are not expected to provide a comprehensive description of its historical development. Instead, students are required to select a topic narrow enough in its scope that it will allow for research under the course’s time constraints.  The paper must include a research question, research sources (8-10 peer reviewed/academic) and theories and produce critical analysis.

1
When a Picture is Worth 1,000 Likes: The Societal Impact of Instagram
Willow Laporte
Communication and Media Technologies
Professor Nava Dushi
8 December 2020
2
As the adage goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. Visual mediums have radically
shifted, and continue to change, the way that societies communicate. The emergence of the
television opened society to a world wherein voyeurism is the norm, a shift magnified when
reality television was popularized and audiences became conditioned concurrently to expect
progressively more intimate details and feel little to no guilt in prying into the lives of others.
From there, one could view social media as the natural conclusion to this downward slide.
‘Regular’ citizens could now engage in the glamour and intrigue of pseudo-celebrity and
broadcast their lives online for other to engage, judge, and comment on. In the same way that
audiences were given the power to ‘vote’ on the fate of their favorite reality stars, now, too,
‘audiences’ online have ways to comment and ‘like’ elements of their peers and family.
Ultimately, this concept comes full circle as a self-fulfilling life prophecy as users are able to
cater their online presence and ‘life’ to the seemingly quantitative data they receive from these
so-called ‘audiences.’ This performative life was born with the digital age and the growth of
Facebook, however a case study can be made for its cultural shifting qualities being cemented
with the second age of social media, an age this paper will refer to as the ‘visual-first’ iteration of
social media. This visual-first age was ushered in with the explosive growth of Instagram, the
first visual forward and mobile exclusive interface. These two key points of change can be traced
to several cultural shifts between the interface’s emergence in 2010 and the societal landscape
experienced by Millennials and Generation Z as the norm today. Within this paper, first a brief
history of Instagram will be undertaken, followed by a contextualization of the app within the
context of social media’s history and its game-changing characteristics. Finally, the bulk of
analysis will be given to three societal shifts occurring, at least in part, due to the popularization
3
of this media. These focuses will be: prioritization of aesthetic living, necessity of life
documentation, and the comparison complex.
How Instagram Came to Be
Instagram, the ‘instant telegram’ social media, was launched in October 2010 and
accumulated an impressive 25,000 downloads within its first day on the Apple app store. By the
end of that year, that number had exploded to over a million downloads. Initially conceived of by
Kevin Systorm, a Stanford University graduate and former employee of both Goog (a Google
company) and Odeo (the company that would become Twitter), as the app ‘Burbn.’ In this first
iteration, the app was a place for fine spirits consumers to “check-in, post their plans, and share
photos” (Investopedia). However, after a fateful Venture Capitalist meeting, where Systrom was
awarded $500,000 in seed money, the app was reevaluated and stripped down to a simpler
functionality and more generic user appeal. This was the point wherein the name was changed to
the now titan Instagram. In its rebirth, the app was stripped down to the following core
components; photo based content and the ability to comment and like user posts.
Instagram in the Context of The Social Media Landscape
Upon its release, the app was the first of its kind in a few key ways. Namely, that it was
an app built with a ‘photo first’ and mobile exclusive interface. As mentioned, the app launched
in 2010 putting it squarely as the bridge between ‘older’ mixed-delivery social media formats,
i.e. Facebook and LinkedIn, and the ‘new’ visual-first social medias of Snapchat and TikTok. As
Fettman & Szymanski smartly state, “due to its rapid growth and exceptional reach, social
networking sites have become an integral part of many people’s daily lives and a standard
method of managing and constructing one’s self-presentation” (2018). Additionally, Fardouly
and Vartanian hypothesized that specific sites potentially had greater effects on body image and
4
individual happiness due, in part, to a greater emphasis on photographic content production and
sharing (Fardouly and Vartanian 2016).
With this in mind, a correlation then is drawn between the introduction of a photo-based
social media, in this case Instagram, and a societal shift towards living in a way that is best suited
to being photographically captured. Before Instagram, a person could easily share a photo
through other social media such as Facebook, but doing so was not the ‘main’ focus on this
platform. Rather, photo content was one of a myriad of content options that users could share,
with the mainstay content being short written ‘life’ updates posted to a user’s wall. If a photo
was to be shared, it was more likely to be the product of a traditionally observed historical
moment of the user’s life, such as a wedding, graduation, or other large milestone. In contrast,
Instagram’s visual-first format required progressively smaller moments in life to be documented
with photos if an individual wants to continually be posting content to their account. Whereas on
Facebook an individual might have written an update such as ‘Had a wonderful lunch with
Megan’ and left it at that. Now, on the visual interface, the same individual would have to take
numerous pictures of the themselves and ‘Megan’ to find one that was flattering to both.
Additionally, attention would have to be paid to how their lunch and choice of restaurant visually
looked in these snapshots, so much so that perhaps they would have attended a more expensive
restaurant in the first place in hopes of gaining a better image to post. This scenario expanded to
a life full of decisions quickly builds a case for a life interrupted and fundamentally changed by
this technology. A consequence that becomes further concerning when taken in context of the
users most drawn to this technology, namely the younger and more vulnerable to social
pressure. Scholars have found that Instagram is at the forefront of all social media use for
younger generations, ranking above all social media offerings except Youtube for adolescents
5
and emerging adults (Bahtiyar & Kircaburun 2017) (Anderson and Jiang 2018). Compounded
with the emergence of smartphone technology that allows users to constantly be connected to
these media, and thus magnify their social altering properties tenfold, it is worth examining how
this technology shapes society and will continue to shape identity moving forward if let
unchecked.
Societal Impacts of Instagram
Aesthetics as King
The movement to a visual-first medium has warped the way millennials and gen z-ers
craft their lives. The younger generations who both were born into a world of this technology, or
received it at a vulnerable age, directly correlate the way their lives look online with their real
world happiness. Karsey explains one of the dangers of these types of social media as follows,
“aggregated likes and comments are seemingly objective, numerical evaluations of the social
success, personality, and even outward appearance of their recipient” (Karsey 2018). In essence,
the ability of users to receive ‘objective’ data around the approval of their peers has led to users
self-censoring themselves online, namely showing only a highlight reel. Again Karsey
summarizes, “the intertwined roles of users as both social media consumers and creators
encourage social comparison and observational learning, which can influence the content and
editing of their photos” (Karsey 2018). This visual movement has changed the way in which
these users now live their lives, as a new aesthetic goal has surmounted the previous happiness
and comfort goals. Users now craft lives that ‘look’ good, but may not feel very good. For
example, Holland and Tiggemann offer an analysis of Instagram posters of ‘fitspiration’
(inspiration to get ‘fit’), “even though they may present as fit and healthy, regularly posting
fitspiration is a culturally sanctioned way of rationalizing dietary restriction, disordered eating,
6
and over‐exercising… these images become part of the contemporary media environment for
other users of social networking sites” (Holland & Tiggemann 2017). A negative feedback loop
thus occurs wherein users are praised for their aesthetics (beautiful and thin workout photos) at
the direct expense of the real individual’s happiness, body image, and quality of life. If a
personal identity is built off of an aesthetic ideal, the real will never be able to compete.
Although social media before Instagram created a space for comparison, Feltman and Szymanski
found that in visual-first social media the effect is amplified due to the emphasis on photos. In
the vein of McLuhan and ‘the medium as the message,’ Instagram’s photo forward nature is a
message that consumers should focus on the visual and aesthetic because that is what their peers
want to see. Clarified further, “the endorsement of photos as a valid means of expressing one’s
identity and obtaining social approval may indicate an increased focus and value placed on one’s
outside appearance when interacting on social networking sites” (Feltman & Szymanski 2018).
Unilaterally, this effect would be cause for worry but the three social effects analyzed do not
operate as singular entities. Instead they exacerbate each other when stacked.
Photojournalism of One & Life Cultivation for Social Media
With a sharp focus on aesthetics, life documentation on social media is emotionally
draining and takes a toll on the user’s real life experience. This fatigue becomes compounded by
the shift from documenting special moments to the constant visual-first digital life users are
expected to maintain currently. In the not-so-distant past, photos were a means to capture
cherished special memories for future reflection. One may have taken photos only on special
occasions or holidays; events that held a higher social rank and would involve dressing up and
being ‘photo-ready’ already. However, Instagram has altered the way society looks at
photographing life. Shifting the focus from a means to an end into life as the means to which a
7
comprehensive photo stream is the ultimate end. Serafinelli puts this phenomenon thusly, “in
combination with the intent of reaching a high number of followers…the practice of photosharing leads toward a careful organization of the sharing of emotions and experiences which
other users can appreciate and engage with” (Serafinelli 2018). Users are carefully organizing
their lives to look good and documenting themselves to an extreme that once was reserved for
high stakes news coverage. Although statistics around average users remain lacking, a Union
Metrics study found that the average brand posts 1.5 times a day (Carbone 2018). Extrapolating
an assumption that the ‘average’ user posts less than that, say once a day, there remains a
massive gap between truly memorable life moments in a given year and the post count behind
Instagram’s documentation of life. Within this context, the photojournalism of one emerges as
users feel the push to garner self-narrative 365 days a year. The pressure to ‘exist’ weighs
heavily on younger generations and, once more, this alone is enough to garner concern, but the
lasting societal effect for discussion is the most destructive yet. A society primed to value
aesthetic life over true life and addicted to self-documenting can progress to only one clear
conclusion, a comparison complex.
The Comparison Complex
Deciding one’s stance in society through comparison to one’s peers is not new in society.
Long before their was social media, or even visual media, individuals situated themselves in life
according to how they stacked up against those around them. The historical prevalence of
classism, sexism, and racism are but a small representation of the ways in which humanity has
defined itself through how it is better, or worse, than those around it. However, these
comparisons used to require an individual to step outside of one’s regular social interactions to
see a meaningful difference. An individual might feel frustration over their situation in life when
8
compared to the elite, but when they looked to their immediate peers, they saw a life similar to
their own and struggling with similar woes. The negative effects of comparison were thus
buffered by two mediating circumstances, access to individuals for comparison and seeing the
similar real life circumstance between peers. Yet in the world of social media, visual-first media
specifically, those guard rails are completely gone in the first instance and hopelessly inverted in
the latter. As Chia-Chen et al remark, “the process of social comparison is particularly relevant
in the digital age as social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, etc.) allow users to easily
access others’ daily updates, providing rich opportunities for social comparison.” These so-called
‘rich opportunities’ are seemingly boundless with social media. In mere seconds any individual,
through the use of an app such as Instagram, can compile endless ‘data’ about their peers and
make thousands of social comparisons instantly and on the go, thanks to the omnipresence of the
internet through mobile phone usage. Chia-Chen continues in this hypothesis saying, “social
media provide a unique context for social comparison… however, information shared on social
media does not reflect the full spectrum of users’ lives. Most users strategically present highly
polished and socially desirable images through selective self-presentation” (2018). This
secondary principle of Instagram is the one that allows for these comparisons to go from
disheartening to dangerous. No longer are individuals measuring how they stack up to their real
life peers, instead they are comparing their real flawed selves to the idealized perfect versions of
their peers. Kleemans et al further layers intricacy in this argument through their research
showing that when viewing photoshopped images of peers on the platform, “girls believed that
the presented Instagram photos showed a representative view of reality and did not notice
reshaping of the bodies” (2018). Reminiscent of the ‘good vibes only’ cry of this generation,
Instagram is for perfect lives only and young users are not able to distinguish the truth from the
9
fallacy. In the theatrical community, there is a concept known as the ‘suspension of disbelief’
that describe the phenomenon wherein an entire audience puts aside their powers of cognitive
oversight in order to immerse themselves fully into the story they are being told. Within an
entertainment context, this concept is a crucial trade off made by the audience in order to have an
entertaining and fulfilling experience. However, with Instagram, young and vulnerable
individuals are making this trade off as well without any of the positive rewards. Conversely,
these individuals are experiencing stress, negative self-esteem, and depression as ‘reward’ for
their investment in this media. Joseph explains that “social comparison on Instagram impacts
feelings of depression. In particular, when users view photos of others, and feel that others have
better lives than they do or others are doing better than they are, such upward social comparison
increased depressed feelings” (2020). The act of viewing these perfect lives and comparing your
own real experience, on its own, would be enough to cause numerous negative effects for an
individual. However, Instagram is a participatory media, one of many ironically named ‘social.’
Individuals are also supposed to contribute their own perfect life narrative, as showcased in the
first two social effects discussed in this paper. In theory, an individual could shirk the system and
instead enact a more realistic narrative, one where the images and experiences shared are not
merely the positive and successful, but when coupled with the breakneck speed and competition
that is not prevalent in what Bauman discerns as ‘liquid modernity,’ this pathway seems to be a
lost option and the perfect digital life becomes the foregone conclusion. As Bauman puts it, “the
most acute and stubborn worries that haunt such a life are the fears of being caught napping, of
failing to catch up with fast-moving events, of being left behind” (2005). With this liquid life, to
turn a cliché, users can’t beat them, so they will join them. Ultimately, this establishes and
fosters the negative feedback loop of Instagram. As Chia-chen specifies, “as most users strive to
10
fulfill the goal (of) delivering a selectively positive image, social media are turned into a
convenient channel for upward social comparison where the comparers easily experience
negative emotions, such as depression, envy, and shame” (2018). Once more, compound this
with the unique ability of social media users to “receive aggregated evaluative feedback in return
through likes and comments” (Butkowski 2019) and the perfect storm has arrived.
Conclusion
Returning to the opening concept of this paper, the creation and popularity of Instagram
has created and condoned a society where ‘a picture is worth a thousand likes’ and the
restructuring of society to adapt to this framework. As an app that permeates user’s life
experiences, through its attachment to the mobile phone, and has a user base of mostly young
and vulnerable consumers, it remains a technology that should continue to be researched and
investigated for its effect on society. Following the theories of Marshall McLuhan, it is
imperative that technologies are not merely taken at their face content value and instead are
analyzed as to the ways in which they shape society, individual identity, and perceptions of
reality. As a technology that has just crested its 10-year anniversary, as of August of this year,
Instagram has had a massive and disproportionate effect on society. One that seems to only get
stronger as the app continues to attract young audiences en masse. Within this paper, the aim has
been to look critically at three of those societal affects that could be more clearly tied to the
visual-first social media age that Instagram has pioneered. These effects, including a shift to
aesthetic living, rigorous self documentation, and a sharpened comparison complex, have been
show as forces that are strengthened by the photograph driven nature of this social media and
have arrived at a time when they can do severe damage through the mediated factor of the ‘liquid
life’ that has now become commonplace. As this app continues to be used and, of important note,
11
gain capital off of the insecurities of a younger generation, researchers must continue to classify
these ill effects in hopes of, at minimum, making consumers aware of the way these technologies
can play into their lives if used without a critical eye. Instagram pictures may be worth ‘a
thousand likes,’ but for a happier society, users must find a way to like themselves instead.
12
References
Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, social media & technology 2018. Retrieved 09
October, 2018, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology2018/.
Bahtiyar, M. & Kircaburun, K. (2017). Investigation of high school students’ social
media use in the context of children’s rights. Paper presented at International Children’s Rights
Congress, Duzce, Turkey.
Bauman, Z. (2005). Liquid life. ProQuest Ebook Central
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Blystone, D. (2020, August 29). The Story of Instagram: The Rise of the # 1 PhotoSharing Application. Investopedia. Retrieved December 12, 2020, from
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/102615/story-instagram-rise-1-photo0sharingapp.asp
Butkowski, C. P., Dixon, T. L., & Weeks, K. (2019). Body surveillance on instagram:
examining the role of selfie feedback investment in young adult women’s body image concerns.
Sex Roles, 81(5-6), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0993-6
Carbone, L. (2018, November 23). How Often Should You Post to Instagram? Retrieved
December 12, 2020, from https://later.com/blog/how-often-post-to-instagram/
Chia-chen, Y., Holden, S. M., & Carter, M. D. K. (2018). Social media social comparison
of ability (but not opinion) predicts lower identity clarity: identity processing style as a mediator.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(10), 2114–2128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-0170801-6
13
Feltman, C. E., & Szymanski, D. M. (2018). Instagram use and self-objectification: the
roles of internalization, comparison, appearance commentary, and feminism. Sex Roles, 78(5-6),
311–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0796-1
Holland, G., & Tiggemann, M. (2017). “Strong beats skinny every time”: Disordered
eating and compulsive exercise in women who post fitspiration on Instagram. International
Journal of Eating Disorders, 50(1), 76–79. https://lynnlang.student.lynn.edu:2092/10.1002/eat.22559
Hwnag, H. S. (2019). Why Social Comparison on Instagram Matters: Its impact on
Depression. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 13(3), 1626+.
Joseph, J. J. (2020). The psychology and dynamics behind social media interactions. In
Facebook, social comparison, and subjective well-being (pp. 268–288). essay, Information
Science Reference. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9412-3.ch011
Karsay, K., Knoll, J., & Matthes, J. (2018). Sexualizing media use and selfobjectification: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42, 9–28.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684317743019.
Kleemans, M., Daalmans, S., Carbaat, I., & Anschütz Doeschka. (2018). Picture perfect:
the direct effect of manipulated instagram photos on body image in adolescent girls. Media
Psychology, 21(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2016.1257392
Serafinelli, E. (2018). Digital life on Instagram: New social communication of
photography. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.
1
Surrendering to Social Media and the Twitter Impact
Maria Kahn
Lynn University
COM 510 A: Communication & Media Technologies
Dr. Nava Dushi
12/11/20
2
Surrendering to Social Media and the Twitter Impact
Social media took the world by storm once it was introduced to society. The intense
human impulse to communicate and connect fueled its growth (Bachelor’s in Marketing, n.d.,
para. 1). Social media is a form of electronic communication where users establish online
communities to share information, thoughts, and personal messages all in the form of texts,
videos, or images (Bachelor’s in Marketing, n.d., para. 2). Statistically, most people nowadays
crave the constant connectedness that social media provides, a network of infinite contacts. A
2019 report regarding social media use in the United States reported that 72% of adult aged
people in the United States use a form of social media, proving the growing presence of social
media in the majority of American adults’ lives (Bachelor’s in Marketing, n.d., para. 2). It’s a
phenomenon that has transformed the interaction and communication of people all throughout
the world (Edosomwan et al., 2011, p. 79). Edosomwan described social media as evolving since
the beginning of human interaction and with today’s technology, it has become an integral
practice in users’ daily routines (Edosomwan et al., 2011, p. 79).
Although social media has evolved throughout the years to adapt to the modern world
encapsulated by digital media, it initially started with the invention of the telephone during the
1950s (Edosomwan et al., 2011, p. 80). The 1960s introduced the advent of email prior to the
internet’s introduction in 1991, as it was used solely as a method to exchange messages between
computers that were online (Edosomwan et al., 2011, p. 80). In the 1990s, a number of social
networking sites were created, including: Six Degrees, MoveOn, and BlackPlanet, which are
and have been niche social networking sites that largely involved public policy advocacy
(Edosomwan et al., 2011, p. 81). Social networking sites enjoyed a great boost in popular usage
among the general population in the early 2000s, transforming the interactions between and
3
among individuals and organizations. This rapid growth was achieved under the pretense of
common interests (Edosomwan et al., 2011, p. 81). Well known sites like MySpace, LinkedIn,
YouTube, and Facebook were among the networks launched in the early 2000s, they have
experienced massive growth since their respective launches, the exception being MySpace, an
early casualty of Facebook’s tremendous success.
A recurring theme that these social networks harbor is the push for obscene visibility and
oversharing amongst their users. They design their websites in a way where they encourage
incessant status updates, engagement, and digitalized interaction, which in turn benefits their
businesses as people find themselves locked into these sites for hours a day. As a society, we
have reached a point where a great deal of us are borderline addicted to technology and social
media, but because it’s so normalized and deep-rooted, we don’t view it in such a serious
context. We certainly don’t parallel the addictiveness of social media in a similar realm to
alcohol and drugs, but the urge is there. We play into the schemes of these sites by oversharing
our lives to appease our urge to be constantly connected which clouds our brains. In turn, we
become aggregated data placed in the hands of the big technology companies who profit from
that data. It’s a choice that we unthinkingly sign off on when skimming through the terms of
service and tapping the app icon on our phones. We engage in this bargain, and we do so
willingly if not as informed as we should be.
Under the guise of oversharing, it seems as though society has embraced social media in
celebration and mockery of the cybernetic importance of modern media practices, which is to
communicate at all costs (Nunes, 2013, p. 7). Funny enough, amidst the continuous increase of
social media all over the world, “oversharing” has become a very popular word, and was even
declared word of the year in 2008 (Nunes, 2013, p. 8). Social networks are able to collect an
4
incredible amount of user data because of this massive increase in oversharing and through the
Will to Update (Nunes, 2013, p. 8). The Will to Update celebrates high-profile visibility, but
only to the degree that people believe they are still in control (Nunes, 2013, p. 14). Do we truly
know exactly what we are in control of when surrendering so much of our information to the
world of data and social graphs? We fall into capitalism’s “fantasy of abundance” through our
continual contributions of personal information from which algorithms are formed (Nunes, 2013,
p. 10). Through these algorithms and social graphs, users are turned into code to be distributed
with the profitable goal of producing algorithmically tailored advertisements per person.
Daniel Trottier explored the changing rules of visibility and privacy on social media
(Trottier, 2012, p. 319). Trottier proposed that when people accept social media into their lives
and engage with it, they endanger their privacy as their battle between privacy and public
exposure becomes a concern (Trottier, 2012, p. 321). Social media is global, and while people
across the continents login, share, and post, they do so without understanding fully the personal
information they surrender. People wouldn’t leave their doors to their homes unlocked, but in
essence, there are no locked doors in the virtual world and the public at large appears to accept
this new reality. Perhaps largely because they remain ignorant of the information they surrender.
The reality is that we surrender a vast amount of personal information when joining social
networking sites because we don’t pay attention to what we’re signing. It’s a capitulation of our
information. Is it worth sacrificing our privacy for public exposure? I would presume that the
millions of users engaging with social media would say yes. The deeper question to ask would be
if people are fully aware of the extent to which our information is seized and studied.
Shoshana Zuboff elaborated on the exposure one experiences when signing up for social
media accounts in The Law of Informational Capitalism journal. Google paved a profitable
5
pathway when they embarked on the discovery of useful data that Zuboff referred to as
“behavioral surplus” (Zuboff & Cohen, 2020, p. 1468). She further explained “in Google’s case,
the purpose was to generate its first profitable business mode: the sale of behaviorally targeted
ads” (Zuboff & Cohen, 2020, p. 1469). Google, like most social networks today, extracts and
collects data from each user’s profile with the goal of targeting advertisements tailored to each
user. This was effortlessly profitable and introduced an easy revenue stream for all social
networks to integrate into their own business models. These businesses thrive off of our personal
information being turned into useful data and we allow it because of the profound societal impact
of submerging us into the world of social media and digitalized life. A world that offers
connections to others, discourse with many, individually tailored advertisements, and regrettably,
polarization of society through media manipulation.
Social media harbors and inflicts a powerful, polarizing effect onto society when it comes
to politics. Political communication goes hand in hand with the constant advancement of
technology (Munger, 2019. P. 643). Social media is a total global phenomenon that enables
people to be communicate with anyone, anywhere on the planet (Munger, 2019, p. 645). When
we zero in on Facebook, we can concur that political interaction on this social network is a social
behavior as users scroll the news feed feature (Munger, 2019, p. 645). Through the news feed
feature, users will develop an expanded conception of the political as they read the political
stances and viewpoints from their friends (Munger, 2019, p. 645). Explicitly political content and
implicitly political content both appear on social networks (Munger, 2019, p. 645). The explicit
content that gets circulated is deemed very bluntly political, while the implicit content can be
something along the lines of supporting a business that’s openly partisan politically like ChickFil-A, which holds conservative viewpoints (Munger, 2019, p. 645). Anyone with access to
6
technology and the internet can have their own social media platform to share their political
viewpoints, which has quickly curated a polarized society because of how rapid and widespread
content spreads. The media endorses this polarization through algorithms and what they choose
to trend. The way content spreads can often become a telephone game with the original meaning
of the message getting misconstrued and lost as it gets bounced around through users and media
outlets. There have been legitimate, actionable policy recommendations aimed at platforms to
reduce the polarization among their users (Munger, 2019, p. 646). Twitter has been considering
removing its “like” button to aid in the prospect of reducing polarization amongst users (Munger,
2019, p. 2019). I am not confident in Twitter taking a step of that nature because it’s evident that
these social networks profit from this politically frustrated, split society.
Twitter exemplifies what it means to be a social networking site that’s also looked at as a
news source. Twitter is an online microblogging service where you can send short messages
among groups of recipients (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2020, para. 1). The trends
featured on Twitter displays breaking news as well as algorithmically tailored news per user.
Similar to Facebook’s news feed feature, Twitter has a timeline feature that will show a stream
of tweets from the profiles that you follow. Twitter is now a leading social network with
hundreds of millions of users across the globe. Most major public figures have active Twitter
accounts like United States Presidents, the Pope, global leaders, politicians, and Hollywood
celebrities. It’s an effective marketing and advertising tool, but it’s also evolved into a news
source on par with major television news networks and print media.
I explained that social media in general enables a political polarization of society. Twitter
in particular is now viewed and utilized as a news source for politics and related discussions.
Nearly all political leaders have Twitter accounts as it’s an effective way to build support and
7
encourage voting. Political leaders send out messages, known as tweets, to their followers every
day, tweets that range from campaign updates to policy information, to personal thoughts
(Parmelee & Bichard, 2011, p. 8). Twitter strongly influences campaigns, governance, and
political leaders’ relationships with the public (Parmelee & Bichard, 2011, p. 8). Politicians on
Twitter are somewhat more accessible, allowing them to engage with their voters, discussing
policy positions, government affairs, and the like. On the other hand, they also receive unfiltered
criticism for their ideas and actions. This interaction opens up the opportunity for politicians to
communicate concerns the public have with policies or actions being taken and try to address or
resolve those disputes. The question is to what degree do political leaders use Twitter to interact
with their followers or to simply talk at them (Parmelee & Bichard, 2011, p. 9)? Often times you
will observe political leaders actively replying to tweets from their followers by answering
questions or providing clarity on issues. This exemplifies how Twitter can in fact facilitate a
closer connection between government and the people (Parmelee & Bichard, 2011, p. 9). A great
strength of Twitter is that it has a limited number of characters that can be used per tweet, so you
must consolidate and simplify what you have to say in a short message (Parmelee & Bichard,
2011, p. 182). Politicians are notorious for giving longwinded speeches and press releases, so
with this character limit, it forces them to simplify what they’re trying to communicate to the
public, which helps to communicate a message with no complication or rambling (Parmelee &
Bichard, 2011, p. 182). Being direct with their followers is beneficial on both ends and circulates
the message faster and more efficiently.
The heavy presence of politics on Twitter poses lots of positives, but there come some
negatives as well. Parmelee and Bichard pointed out that “on the other hand, of course, if people
follow and interact with only those leaders with whom they agree politically, Twitter may be
8
harmful for democracy (by further enabling people to block out diverse views)” (Parmelee &
Bichard, 2011, p. 10). Of course, it makes sense that people naturally prefer to follow people
with whom they agree with and have similar values, but Twitter has intensified this polarization
and division of people. They have encouraged and marketed the notion that individuals with
differing political viewpoints cannot mesh or unify whatsoever. Twitter is able to execute this
division partly through algorithms that tailor information and trends for users based on their
political stances and searches. This results in a decline of opposing information being presented
to the users, posing the risk of an ill-informed and/or under-informed public. It’s important that
people are exposed to information from all sides, so that they can have confidence in
constructing a well-informed opinion. Being exposed to all information also allows people to be
exposed to others from all over the political spectrum and perhaps to come together in healthy
debate and discourse. Progress is more likely with a unified public.
Not only has Twitter had immense influence on the political sphere, but also on libraries
as a means of reaching users (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 1). It’s utilized as a
marketing tool for library services as well (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 1). Social
networking sites like Twitter have penetrated the business and social spheres, but now they’re
penetrating the educational sphere as well (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 2). Libraries
are institutions that aim to assist people with finding necessary information. Recent studies find
an increasing number of people are turning towards social networking sites to find and exchange
information with peers (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 3). Studies found that libraries
often turn to Twitter and social networking sites for free advertising as well as increased
productivity for law librarians (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 11). Libraries utilize
Twitter to create and promote a sense of community as they believe Twitter can assist library
9
administration and leadership by promoting this sense of community (Vassilakaki &
Garoufallou, 2015, para. 12). Twitter provides vast and seamless outreach for libraries. Libraries
take advantage of this outreach by using twitter to transform the way they exchange messages
(Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 13). Libraries use Twitter as a way to more easily
approach teenagers and market their services in a modernized way that mirrors the way teenagers
connect and share content with each other (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 13). The use
of Twitter greatly enhances libraries’ reference services through consistent promotion and
marketing on the site (Vassilakaki & Garoufallou, 2015, para. 18). It’s important for libraries to
keep up with the technological advances trending in society to stay relevant with each
generation. This means changing the way they market their services and how they communicate
with their users.
Twitter has assuredly made waves in the world of academia. I’ve touched on its impact
on libraries, but it also has a strong presence in concept learning. Social networking sites like
Twitter aid in the engagement levels of students in the classroom by providing a mobile platform
that involves students in extended class discussions, moving beyond the physical classroom
(Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 2). There’s a debate about whether incorporating Twitter in the
classroom helps or distracts students. Overall, it’s hard to ignore the potential Twitter holds as an
educational tool given the ever-growing popularity of the site (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 6). For
educators to appropriately utilize Twitter in providing an effective lesson, they must understand
how their students utilize Twitter (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 6). It has been discovered that
Twitter has a positive impact on informal learning, class dynamics, motivation, and academic
development, emphasizing Twitter’s enhancement to education (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 7).
10
Students make up a huge percentage of the total active users on Twitter, allowing for educational
opportunity through mobile learning.
Hashtags, popularized by Twitter users to mark keywords in a tweet, became interactive
flashcards. Twitter hashtags can become flashcards, a learning tool (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para.
9). Instructors who have employed this flashcard strategy in their lessons found it simple to
search for other flashcards from the class and properly organize them (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para.
9). This strategy makes it possible for students to tweet their flashcards in live time, which can
then prompt other students to have ideas and create flashcards (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 9).
Twitter provides an efficient and better functioning platform for this type of interactive learning
where students bounce ideas off each other as opposed to other learning management systems
like Blackboard (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 9). The format of Twitter is ideal for concept
learning when factoring in Twitter’s 280-character limit per tweet because it requires users to
create a short and concise statement (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 15). It’s an exceptional platform
for examples and non-examples of concepts (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 15). Studies show that
Twitter can be as effective a study tool as traditional review worksheets. Students incorporate
Twitter into their studies with ease (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para. 60). A crucial takeaway from
these conclusions is that instructors must utilize Twitter in a way that encourages discussion and
at the same time spreads key information to assist in concept learning (Buzzelli et al., 2016, para.
61). Clearly, young people today and future generations are and will be fully engaged in this all
engrossing technological world. Taking educational advantage of the social networking sites that
young people spend hours scrolling through could have them more engaged in their coursework,
using tools familiar to them, tools they comfortably and confidently use. The potential exists to
11
add new dimensions, presentations, to the academic world, by adding social networking sites like
Twitter to the educator’s toolbox, so to speak.
Twitter has transformed and influenced the way we communicate. The short 280character limit on tweets pushes people to create concentrated messages that often eradicate any
nuance (Paulas, 2017, para. 5). Users emphasize certain words in their tweets by using
capitalization and asterisks sometimes resulting in abrasive messaging, which continues to
emphasize the lack of nuance (Paulas, 2017, para. 5). The ability to self-publish and orchestrate a
chronological timeline reflects the immediacy of the medium as it urges people to publish in a
“stream-of-consciousness” style as opposed to “official” edited statements (Paulas, 2017, para.
6). Something unique and rather aggravating about Twitter is the inability to edit a message after
it’s sent, so typos are a frequent occurrence in this type of format (Paulas, 2017, para. 7). This
frequency of typos and errors have cast a predictable effect of forgiving typos or seeing typos as
part of the message itself (Paulas, 2017, para. 7). This pairs well with the “stream-ofconsciousness” style of posting as it also exemplifies a forgiveness of errors (Paulas, 2017, para.
7). It’s important to understand that truth is more malleable and flexible on Twitter, resulting in
the possibility that the audience reads the same message in various ways (Paulas, 2017, para. 7).
This has contributed to the polarization of society by social media. News gets reported in a
“stream-of-consciousness” style with malleable truth, resulting in a significant amount of
misinformation in the twitter universe. The immediacy of news can be very convenient and
favorable in the moment, but it comes at a price, that price being lost credibility. The truth
struggles to catch up to a tweeted mistruth.
In conclusion, the dominance of social media has irrefutably and irredeemably
transformed society politically, socially, and scientifically. With our increasing dependence on
12
social networking sites, we sign off on the capitulation of our information, the aggregated data
we become, all for the sake of staying current and maintaining a social image. Most of us are not
fully aware of the extent to which we are surrendering personal details of our lives, and even if
we are, we look beyond the concern because of the connections, stimulation, and selfgratification these social media platforms provide us. I’ve highlighted Twitter in particular to
exemplify how one singular site can have such a powerful effect on our society whether it be
integrating itself into academic classrooms or affecting the public’s political discourse. Twitter
has its positive attributes, for example, providing a platform for breaking news. Still, Twitter has
its negative characteristics, for example, providing a platform for news and information that is
false, factually wrong.
Judging by the hundreds of millions of users on Twitter and other social networking sites,
social media is here to stay. It is up to us to be responsible and understand what information we
surrender when joining these sites. We must also understand how to navigate these sites,
knowing that the abundance of information and news available to us is not always the truth. In
other words, as with all manner of communication from talking over the fence with your
neighbor, to sending and receiving tweets across the globe, consider the source.
13
References
Bachelor’s in Marketing. (n.d.). The Evolution of Social Media: How Did It Begin, and
Where Could It Go Next? Maryville University. Retrieved from
https://online.maryville.edu/blog/evolution-social-media/
Buzzelli, A., Holdan, E. G., Rota, D., & McCarthy, J. (2016). Utilizing Twitter for
Concept Learning. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology
Education, 12(1).
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A439536366/PROF?u=boca54337&sid=PROF&xid=223c252d
Edosomwan, S., Prakasan, S. K., Kouame, D., Watson, J., & Seymour, T. (2011). The
History of Social Media and its Impact on Business. Journal of Applied Management and
Entrepreneurship, 16(3), 79-91. http://lynnlang.student.lynn.edu:2048/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/889143980?accountid
=36334
Munger, K. (2019). Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 83(3), 643-646. https://lynn-lang.student.lynn.edu:2092/10.1093/poq/nfz037
Parmelee, J. H., & Bichard, S. L. (2011). Politics and the twitter revolution : How tweets
influence the relationship between political leaders and the public. ProQuest Ebook
Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Paulas, R. (2017 June 14th). How Does Twitter Influence the Way We Communicate?
Pacific Standard. Retrieved https://psmag.com/news/how-does-twitter-influence-the-way-wecommunicate
14
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2020 October 22nd). Twitter microblogging
service. Britannica. Retrieved https://www.britannica.com/topic/Twitter
Trottier, D. (2012). Interpersonal Surveillance on Social Media. Canadian Journal of
Communication, 37(2), 319-332. https://lynnlang.student.lynnn.edu:2092/10.22230/cjc.2012v37n2a2536
Vassilakaki, E., & Garoufallou, E. (2015). The impact of Twitter on libraries: a critical
review of the literature. The Electronic Library, 33(4), 795-809. http://lynnlang.student.lynn.edu:2083/10.1108/EL-03-2014-005
Wise, J. M. (2013). New visualities, new technologies : The new ecstasy of
communication. ProQuest Ebook Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com Loon, J. van. (2008).
Media Technology: Critical Perspectives. McGraw-Hill Education
Zuboff, S., & Cohen, J. E. (2020). The Law of Informational Capitalism. Yale Law
Journal, 129(5), 1460-1515.
Research Paper — How to structure your work
Typically research papers are structured around several
components or subheading. The following lists some of the key
components of a research paper and may be expanded to include
additional elements.
1. The preface provides an introduction of the topic, the
questions that the research poses, and a the thesis that the
research proposes (which means in general terms what is the
approach that you take toward answering the question/s).
2. The second part should provide some background information
about the specific topic that the research seeks to examine
highlighting areas that have not been addressed, or areas that
were not sufficiently addressed, or areas that point to new
concerns and issues that need to be addressed.
3. The third segment should include a review of your theoretical
sources and a discussion of the theoretical tools that you
intend to apply (in simple terms, this section should offer a
description of your critical tool box).
4. The fourth section should include a description of your
methodology (how you select the content that you intent to
study listing scope (i.e. collecting data from only one source
such as Facebook, from multiple sources in the case of a
comparative study etc.) and time frame (through what time
period, i.e. over the course of a week/a month/a year, between
specific dates around a certain event, etc.).
5. The fifth section should be your actual analysis (assuming
that non of you intend to conduct a quantitative research).
6. The last section should offer your conclusion which sums up
the discussion, reiterates its findings and makes suggestions
for future thoughts.
7. Research notes
8. Work cited list
9. Appendices
You may divide the body of your work into such subheadings or
write one continuous paper while making sure that all these
items are included in your work. If you choose to use
subheadings you may name them/give them titles. Make sure to
title your work.
Let me know if I can help.
COM 510: Rubric for Assessment of Final Paper
SLOs
Exemplary
Proficient
Satisfactory
Basic
Unsatisfactory
Summarize and
interpret seminal
theories in
communication and
media (1.1)
The final paper
demonstrates a superior
quality summary and
interpretation of
research theories.
The final paper
demonstrates a clear
summary and insightful
interpretation of
research theories.
The final paper
demonstrates an
adequate summary and
interpretation of
research theories.
The final paper
demonstrates an
adequate summary but
lacks interpretation of
research theories.
The final paper does
not demonstrate an
adequate summary or
interpretation of
research theories.
Interpretation of
effects of media
technologies (2.3)
The final paper shows a
high-level evaluative
interpretations of the
effects of media
technologies on society.
The final paper shows
moderate-level
evaluative
interpretations of the
effects of media
technologies on society.
The final paper shows
average-level
evaluative
interpretations of the
effects of media
technologies on.
The final paper shows
poor-level evaluative
interpretations of the
effects of media
technologies on.
The final paper shows
no evaluative
interpretations of the
effects of media
technologies on society.
Critique and evaluate
the use of
communication
technologies (5.3)
The final paper
demonstrates
exemplary and
insightful critical
analysis of the use of
communication
technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates an
insightful critical
analysis of the use of
communication
technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates an
adequate analysis of the
use of communication
technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates a less
than adequate analysis
of the use of
communication
technologies.
The final paper does
not provide an analysis
of the use of
communication
technologies.
Evaluate the validity
of research sources
(6.1)
The final paper
demonstrates superior
skills in evaluating the
validity of research
sources.
The final paper
demonstrates good
skills in evaluating the
validity of research
sources.
The final paper
demonstrates adequate
skills in evaluating the
validity of research
sources.
The final paper
demonstrates poor
skills in evaluating the
validity of research
sources.
The final paper does
not demonstrate any
skills in evaluating the
validity of research
sources.
Integrate existing
research in original
analyses. (6.3)
The final paper
demonstrates superior
skills in integrating
existing research and
provide an excellent
original analysis of
media technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates good
skills in integrating
existing research and
provide a proficient
original analysis of
media technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates adequate
skills in integrating
existing research and
provide an adequate
original analysis of
media technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates poor
skills in integrating
existing research and
provide a poor analysis
of media technologies.
The final paper
demonstrates a lack of
skills in integrating
existing research and
will not provide an
original analysis of
media technologies.
COM 510: Rubric for Assessment of Final Paper