http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXHHtBAByUQ
My response to this 60 Minute Zuckerberg Interview
The invention of writing was first seen negatively because it replaced our need for memory. Likewise, computerized and programmed social networking, although it may allow you to “[reconnect] with an old pal or [share] photos with family”, limits our efforts and changes our methods of being social (0:04). According to Marc Zuckerberg, by using a “feature that pulls up your [relationship history] with any of your Facebook friends”, “you can see all the things that you have in common with that person”, which he believes will “give you this amazing connection with that person” (5:20). Not only does Facebook cause you to depend on a program to find connections between you and a friend (photos, interests, groups, events and pages in common), but it also makes you question your thoughtfulness: if a relationship was that important to you, wouldn’t you put in your own efforts to remember these special things? If a friendship is not worthwhile enough for you to remember common interests, when your friendship is virtualized through Facebook, why do you find it necessary to care about and record these factors? For example, if it were pre-Facebook era and I had a boyfriend, I could access how much I liked this boy through analyzing my methods of socializing with him: how much effort do I put into spending time with him and learning about him? However through Facebook, I can easily learn relevant and personal things about him (for example, what he is doing every hour through status updates), yet how personal is this “personal” information if it is being blasted to hundreds of other virtual “friends”, some of which known, but a majority being meaningless.
When I watched this 60 Minutes segment when it aired, I couldn't help but see the negatives of the new Facebook format as Zuckerberg was presenting the positives (thanks to Semiotics, I guess?). As said in this post, Facebook is supposed to be for "learn[ing] relevant and personal things [about people], yet how personal is this “personal” information?" if a "majority [of the info is] meaningless"? Facebook, therefore, has this illusion of being personal, but in reality, it is not. You might think you know someone just through Facebook, but in reality, the only way to know someone is by talking face-to-face with them. Therefore, Marc Zuckerberg saying the new format is even more personal is a pretty false statement. It only has the illusion of being personal.
ReplyDeleteI posted my blog about this 60 Minutes before it was about to air and I talked about the thumbnail showing a smiling Mark Zuckerberg. He's really really proud of what he's accomplished (as he should) but I don't think he realizes--at all--facebook's implications. We are turning into a group of people who are as unsocial as possible because of our addiction to a supposed social network. With more and more things going up about facebook, I'm finding more and more reasons to delete mine. Why do I need it? I still have a phone and I still have the ability to speak and communicate. Yet, I think it would be impossible for me to delete my facebook and I'm sickened by this fact. I'm less social with my facebook because I can hide behind my computer screen. Facebook isn't a sharing site, as Zuckerberg claims, yet an oversharing/stalking site. With the "friendship" of another user, you can see a lot about them. You can virtually pretend you were with them by going through their photos and looking at their wall posts with others. I guess Mark Zuckerberg never imagined how much the popularity of his site would diminish his intentions.
ReplyDeleteIf we look back to the Social Network, Zuckerberg was portrayed as an anti-social jerk, who could not develop a relationship in the real world. His only talent resided in code, tiny data packets that he could bend to his will. From this came FaceMash, a way to retaliate on getting dumped. But from this he learned, the internet could award him with short lived fame: he had become notorious at Harvard University. And from this grew thefacebook, a place Zuckerberg could have thousands of friends, some that he may not even know, but still see what he had in common with them. Facebook is not a social networking site, it is a place that Marc can see people he could possibly be "friends" with.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do agree that Facebook is changing the way people interact socially, I think that many people are too quick to polarize the issue and much too quick to make Mark Zuckerberg the villain. True, he might perceive the effects the site has on us differently, but it seems as if the 60 minutes interview is being hypocritical and attempting to twist Mark's personality into what they think it is instead of showing truly who he is. Comments on how his frequency of blinking only attempt to bias the viewer against him in a nonconstructive way. Facebook may be altering the way we interact as a society, but it's still voluntary. Seeking to blame one person for its adverse effects when it is still up to each individual whether or not to use it is simply not logical.
ReplyDelete