Beaten into shape.
I deleted all social media in August, including TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube.
I decided to do so because I noticed I would subconsciously meander to them when faced with even a brief moment of absent occupation.
I was nervous to do so since I had spent so much of my time absorbing "productive content." I didn't know what to do with my free time. Would I be sitting around?
The funny part is that, on social media, I was doing that, sitting around.
Since then, I've created, developed, grown, and reclaimed some of my identity.
The degradation of my identity was the most shocking realization I've made since embarking on this "media cleanse." At first, it seemed the absence couldn't be related to social media. I had such a strong connection to the content I consumed.
However, from observing my peers, I began to draw some parallels between their behaviors and experiences from my own social media use.
I can think of two individuals specifically who I'll leave unnamed. These two are the most avid social media users I know. Their source of entertainment, news, and subjective reality hinge on the algorithmic architect.
Shallow regurgitations of opinion dominate political discussions and omit any genuine personal conviction. Their opinions are faint echoes of the biased extremism that is increasingly plaguing our societal cohesion.
Their idiolect is noticeably scattered with references and slang from the digital specter. They realize but will not accept that this vernacular serves no purpose other than signaling their station within the echo chamber.
They subtly mirror the idealistic expectations of repute imposed on their psyche.
The current social construct has ushered into gatherings the unspoken warfare characterized by stereotypical high society. The degree of relatedness to the chronically online but heroically detached individual signifies their dominance and hierarchical standing within the group. Underhanded compliments and shallow laughter infiltrate friendships and discussions.
Conversations I have observed within the social circle of the abovementioned individuals noticeably follow a formulaic structure: initial reference to particular content, then a challenge of knowledge on the subject, and finally, a passive-aggressive response to the ignorance of the topic.
It's easy to label my opinions as cynical or ridiculous.
It's easy to assume I dislike these individuals. I don't. However, I increasingly see inappropriate behavior in people my age, and it frustrates me. Media dependence is an insult to humanity's collective intelligence and free will.
To disagree in this age is to surrender to denial.
Media has crossed a line that separates a valuable tool and an abusive presence.
Below are three examples of destructive consequences that follow media devotion.
1) Inability to disagree
Social media technologies are astonishingly skilled at recognizing what captivates your attention and using that information to exploit you. Algorithms are designed to relentlessly reinforce your implanted biases.
Understanding this, it is not difficult to see that when we are spoonfed positive reinforcement like children, we react negatively to resistance.
Try to disagree with someone, and you will forever leave a bad taste in their mouth. An outsider is dangerous to a person conditioned to reliance and subservience to a particular school of thought.
As an example, take the polygamist communities of southern Utah. From an early age, they were fed utopic ideologies designed to enslave them for exploitation.
This is eerily reminiscent of our relationship to the media we consume.
Extremist media captivates and detains us.
The most absurd irony is that we disagree constantly. The rise of extremism in media is a blessing to the perpetrators and a plague to the consumers.
Negativity bias is well studied. Negativity bias is the tendency for individuals to place greater importance on negative emotions than positive ones.
The link below delves into negativity bias, specifically during development.
Media creators effectively leverage negativity bias. Extremist thought that provokes anger and distrust keeps us coming back for more.
The steady drive toward extremism has led to a warped relationship with conflict and conflict resolution. When we encounter conflict in the real world, it is frequently met with the charged emotions we're used to. Attacking the outsider is easier than evaluating your own sham identity.
2) Discomfort to deviate
The psyop of conflicting groups has negatively affected our social function. Anger and resentment towards outside groups affect not only the target of the assault but the attacker as well. Accompanying disdain for outside thought comes a fear of deviation from the inside group.
This is especially true given the political tension experienced in the United States.
Trying to compromise on a rival idea means being labeled and struck down.
There is a fine line many are walking, fueled by the fear of differentiation.
This extends beyond the political sphere. What used to be defined as fringe or eccentric has hit the mainstream, leading to an interesting paradox in which appealing to uniqueness produces commonality.
To connect with your unique identity, you must realize how deeply engrained your socialization is and detach your consciousness from the machine.
3) Reluctance to connect
In a world of simulations, reality is daunting. Where simulations are predictable and comforting, reality is unpredictable and uncomfortable.
Where simulations validate us, reality contradicts us.
Facing reality is dangerous.
Loneliness is on the rise. The Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, has stressed that loneliness is a significant public health concern. When constantly coddled, stepping out of a comfort zone is complex and scary, especially for young people.
Some of my University classes are noticeably quiet and void of conversation. There seems to be a fog of tension, as if the looming threat of judgment is deadly.
Interaction comes with risk. There is a risk someone will disagree with us; there is a risk they won't like us. This is outright dangerous in a culture where extremism and hate persist in an ever-consuming part of our lives.
Dating, especially, is difficult. It is difficult to connect with someone when we expect constant reinforcement and validation for our paper-thin egos.
This all sounds quite overwhelming. What can we learn?
We can learn from putting down the ephemeral joys of content consumption.
We can learn from living and using our free time not to scroll but to accomplish.
We can learn that stepping out of our comfort zone and being bold enough to disagree forces us to grow. Accept your own opinions and defend them.
We can learn to listen to others and challenge our preconceptions and ideas.
We can learn from talking to someone new.
Now more than ever, it is crucial to disconnect and discover who we are. What do you believe, and what do you value? How many of your opinions are your own?
It can be debated that we are never really ourselves—social media or not.
Our genetics and experiences shape who we are, and we have little say in it; we are simply clay molded by our circumstances.
This is a cheap cop-out.
Likening agency and liberty to a bag in the wind diminishes personal identity.
We make choices constantly, and we are affected by our choices.
Circumstances do not shape us. Choices have led us to where we are today.
We can act on the situation at hand or be beaten into shape.
Will you choose to act, or will you decide to kneel?
Member discussion