Category Archives: Uncategorized

            The 2016 Presidential Election acts as a macrocosm for all the downsides of social media that critics have been so adamant in pointing out. More so than any other elections before it, social media played a huge role for both sides- through the campaigns, the use of rhetoric to arouse support, and in the spread of headlines.

            Throughout this election, Donald Trump used social media as a platform to connect with his base, and many of his supporters followed suit. In using this tactic, Trump was able to easily create headlines, spur his base forwards, and create an environment that exploited the downsides of social media to heavily divide people from one another. Many on the opposite side of the aisle, including candidate Hillary Clinton, but none were able to garner anywhere near the level of momentum that Trump was using this tactic.

            There was nothing new to be learned in terms of social dynamics in this process- rather, this election served to unearth the heavy divides between American citizens that almost always existed. Social media sites became highly politicized and were often the grounds on which arguments between people ignited into virtual shouting matches. These arguments between people online were often built on the increasing bias found in many news sources, paired with the increasing nature of social media websites such as Facebook and Twitter to act more as echo chambers than anything.

            Part of the reason for this conflict is the format of social media as a whole. Most social media websites use algorithms to determine what shows up in each user’s news feed. Though these algorithms will differ slightly depending on what site, the gist is simple- if a user has shown interest in a certain topic, that user will be shown more of that content based on past interest. While convenient in many cases, this sort of algorithm only works to further divide people come election time. If a user is shown only content based on their own interests, that same user will put less stock into more reliable sources of news.

Social media sites are also notorious for their propensity for fraud. For example, Twitter- which could be considered the main culprit of social media sites in terms of fake users- allows users to create anonymous accounts in minutes. These opinions can then be tweeted out in out in short, 280-character bursts- which, as Sam Saunders of NPR points out, “makes Twitter antithetical to sophisticated, thoughtful political conversation” (1). This issue, in conjunction with heavily biased new sites, allowed misinformation to rapidly spread through the internet.

Through the means of huge divides that social media is largely responsible for, Donald Trump was able to win the 2016 election. He did this by working to undermine the credibility of the press through Twitter, which allowed him to ignite feuds at a whim. Along with this, social media had evolved to largely create a personal echo-chamber for each individual user, serving to broaden the gaps in political views between people and to undermine previously trusted news-sources purely by the massive influx of extreme headlines. Overall, social media’s role in the 2016 presidential election was to make it a battle of extremes in which winning became more important than what was best for the most people. It destroyed moderate opinions, and largely created the political environment in which Americans live today.

Citations

1.     Sanders, Sam. “Did Social Media Ruin Election 2016?” NPR, NPR, 8 Nov. 2016, www.npr.org/2016/11/08/500686320/did-social-media-ruin-election-2016.   

Rihanna’s and Chris Brown’s huge controversy back in 2009 was so infamous that it is considered basic pop culture knowledge. Every 00’s teen knows that the singer was violently attacked and abused by her boyfriend at the time. Photos of her disfigured face were all over the media. Chris Brown was arrested, plead guilty, and sentenced to community service. People talked about it everywhere. The polemic was so intense that the story was spoken for months, even years: In 2015, Rihanna gave an interview talking about the topic, in 2017 Chris Brown apologized in his documentary, and in March of this year the case had once again returned to the spotlight when Snapchat, a commonly used social media platform, made a dark and twisted joke about the situation.

In a “Would you rather” game-like style advert, they asked if the user would prefer to “slap Rihanna or punch Chris Brown”. Fans and people from all over the world from all kinds of social media immediately responded to the ad. They claimed that the platform wasn’t supposed to joke with that, once this subject could be delicate for people (like Rihanna) who suffered from domestic violence. The singer decided not to be quiet about it, instead, she replied to Snapchat on Instagram, stating: “Now SNAPCHAT I know you already know you ain’t my fav app out there! But I’m just trying to figure out what the point was with this mess. I’d love to call it ignorance but I know you ain’t that dumb. You spent money to animate something that would intentionally bring shame to DV victims and made a joke of it.”

As a result, Snapchat pulled the ad and put a brief apology for it, arguing that it indeed was against its violence conducts. They also claimed they would try to never make this same type of mistake again. After the scandal, the shares in the stock of the company dropped noticeably. In total, they lost approximately the possibility of making 1 billion dollars.

In this situation, the social media was not the platform that held a social dynamic, it was what incited the controversy. Due to a bad joke, Snapchat lost lots of users and potential money. Rihanna’s fans posted on twitter that they would delete the app in a way to boycott it. Snapchat making an apology and calling its own acts disgusting was not enough. In addition, once a big company like Snapchat make such mistake online, it can never be forgotten. Such experience also proves the power that digital influencers have on the mass.

If she tells me to delete snapchat I’ll do it @rihanna pic.twitter.com/yUW1UOzNc2

— Nicollette Williams (@nicollettemw) March 15, 2018

Rihanna said delete Snapchat so guess what I’m doing pic.twitter.com/XpSEry8PPY

— Agron (@Agronveliu97) March 16, 2018

Rihanna: Delete Snapchat
Me: Ok
Rihanna: And put this pound of Skittles into separate bowls by color
Me: Anything for you
Rihanna: Throw a brick through that Starbucks window
Me: Sure thing mom
Rihanna: Play me Pour It Up on the piano
Me: Will have to learn but coming right up

— Maryellen Stewart (@maryellen) March 15, 2018

Citations

“http://time.com/5201774/snapchat-stock-drops-after-rihanna-statement/,” Rihanna Called Snapchat Out For a Domestic Abuse Ad. Now Their Stock Is Dropping. Time. N. p., 2018. Web. 8 Nov. 2018.

Levin, Sam, and Laura Snapes. “Rihanna Wipes $1Bn Off Snapchat After Criticising App For Making A ‘Joke’ Of Domestic Violence.” the Guardian. N. p., 2018. Web. 8 Nov. 2018.

“Rihanna Controversy Costs Snapchat Big As Stock Value Immediately Drops.” HuffPost UK. N. p., 2018. Web. 8 Nov. 2018.

Beaumont-Thomas, Ben. “Chris Brown Discusses Abuse Of Rihanna: ‘I Felt Like A Monster’.” the Guardian. N. p., 2017. Web. 8 Nov. 2018.

“Rihanna Responds To Controversial Snapchat Advertisement: ‘Throw The Whole App-Oligy Away’.” Billboard. N. p., 2018. Web. 8 Nov. 2018.

Have you ever tried to lessen your punishment from your parents with crocodile tears? Well, Laura Lee attempted to fool her audience the same way. Laura Lee is a makeup artist on YouTube with over 4 million subscribers, although unfortunately for her, the numbers are rapidly declining due to an unavailing apology video. What exactly did she do? Like most arguments in the age of social media, it began on twitter. It all started when her fellow YouTuber friend, Gabriel Zamora, posted a picture of ‘her squad’ on twitter, captioning it “b***h is bitter because we’re doing better”, indirectly attacking the respected YouTuber, Jeffree Star. This caused fans of Jeffree to find controversial tweets of Laura Lee, that read:

Due to the prevalence of political correctness in mainstream and social media, today’s youth are more sensitive than ever towards topics such as racism, homophobia, etc, rightfully so. Thus leading to an environment which embodies a zero-tolerance policy towards anybody, specifically those who have a platform and a young, impressionable audience. Owing to this, social media influencers who face intense backlash for controversial tweets are expected to express guilt, regret, remorse and shame towards their despicable actions in the form of a heartfelt apology, yet none of this was displayed in Laura’s video. After Laura’s tweets resurfaced, she released an apology video which many deemed to be superficial and lacking any real emotion, leading to its removal. Many rightfully argued that due to the stars age (twenty-four when she made these tweets) that she should have possessed enough maturity to comprehend the deep racist connotations that the tweets hold.

Everyone makes mistakes, however it is important to hold those with a large audience accountable. With Laura having over 4 million subscribes, it is important that her voice is one that spreads positivity, love and acceptance; which is why her apology is so crucial as it shows her young fans that what she said in her past tweets is unacceptable, while also showing the importance of growing from your mistakes. Which from her lacklustre apology, shows that she failed miserably to achieve this goal.

On the other hand, there are some who see this attack on Laura as going too far, since the tweets were written six years ago. However, I feel that it is of the upmost importance that these successful influencers are not given a free pass. The racism depicted in her tweets is deplorable and her apology fails to communicate any sense of real regret to those who were deeply offended by her words.

Back in October of 2012, a teenager from Port Coquitlam, British Columbia committed suicide due to her struggles with bullying and cyber-bullying. At the age of 12, Amanda Todd was taken advantage of when an older male persuaded her to flash her breasts on an online webcam group chat. Someone screenshotted it and sent it around to all of Amanda’s Facebook friends and her life took a turn for the worst. From then on she would continuously receive threats and hate comments both online and in person. Through these events, Amanda’s struggles with depression and anxiety skyrocketed. She moved around to many different towns and schools although the photo haunted her everywhere she went, the bullying never stopped. In September of 2012, Amanda posted a soon-to-be viral Youtube video titled “My story: Struggling, bullying, suicide, self harm” telling her story about her struggles with bullying. Soon after in October 10, 2012, Amanda Todd took her own life in her home.

Now in 2018 the chilling YouTube video has over 12 million views and was watched by people from all over the world. Her story sparked a conversation on bullying, specifically cyberbullying which was considered relatively new at the time. It brought light to something that was new and was never going away. Bullying had surpassed name-calling and stuffing kids in lockers. Social media gave individuals the ability to hate on someone anonymously and within the comfort of their own homes. It spread awareness on how to be safe, avoid predators online and it sparked a conversation amongst families within Canada and all over the world about cyberbullying and online safety.

Cyber-bullying has existed since the early 2000’s with the introduction of social media sites like myspace and Facebook. Although, it was an issue noticed by those affected by it and it was not viewed as a public issue. Social media is growing exponentially by the minute, making it easier for anyone to hide behind a screen and post or message something hurtful without thinking twice. Amanda’s story exposed an ongoing issue within the new social media world. It was a story that went viral throughout mainstream media and ironically social media. It made people realise the effects of bullying and how one mean comment or post could cause someone to do the unthinkable and end their own life. As a society we must end this online hate culture that is so prevalent throughout social media and continue to share stories like Amanda’s in order to spread awareness and prevent the horrific outcomes of cyberbullying.

Sources:

Leung Wency, and Dakshana Bascaramurty. “Amanda Todd Tragedy Highlights How Social Media Makes Bullying Inescapable.” The Globe and Mail, 12 Oct. 2012, www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/amanda-todd-tragedy-highlights-how-social-media-makes-bullying-inescapable/article4611068/.

“Timeline of the Amanda Todd Cyberbullying Case.” Www.vancouversun.com, 18 Apr. 2014, www.vancouversun.com/technology/Timeline Amanda Todd cyberbullying case/9750949/story.html.

TheSomebodytoknow. My story: Struggling, bullying, suicide, self harm, YouTube, 7 Sept. 2012, www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOHXGNx-E7E&t=12s.

Instagram is probably one of the most controversial social media platforms after Twitter. Unlike Twitter which allows people to express their opinions openly, which could cause issues as we have just seen with the Cardi B and Nicki Minaj fight, Instagram brings up a lot of discussions with respect to self-portrayal. If you are one of the few people that have never experienced the whole works of Instagram, it is basically a platform where one is able to share pictures with their followers. This social media platform has grown immensely and also causes a lot of issues in the younger generations. Instagram initially came out with intentions of being a place where people could share their favourite pictures and essentially share their lives with others but in a more visual manner. Over time, it evolved into a place where people cared about their “follow ratio,” the aesthetic of their feed, and the amount of “likes” that they got on one picture. The motives driving young individuals to take part in this culture on Instagram has become a controversial topic simply because the ethics and intentions were strange in a way.

On Instagram, individuals pick their best pictures, edit them (or even photoshop them) and then wait for the optimal time to post so that they can have the highest probability of having the maximum amount of likes and comments. This process might not apply to all people of course; however, it is something that is not uncommon. In fact, for a while, it was also not uncommon for people to tag their friends (who were not even in the picture) in their pictures so that they could let them know that they were important to them. Having spoken to my younger sister, I learned that she and her friends used to strategically place the tags on the picture to essentially indicate and “rate” their friends based on importance.

This whole process and social dynamic are questioning. Before social media existed, people interacted with each other physically and the image they created for themselves was only through the way they carried themselves and not what they chose to show to the public. The only way people let their friends know that they were important to them was either verbally or by body language. With Instagram, people can choose to show a specific side of themselves that might not necessarily be authentic and essentially, they compete against other people to see who can fabricate their life the best while also fulfilling the criteria in the Instagram culture.

However, one could argue that even without Instagram, this social dynamic was still present and without a doubt it was. But, with a social media like this, people now have the ability to create an almost fake and exaggerated version of what they wanted to show to the public and in a sense, the magnification of this social norm takes away from the unique identity of each persona. Instagram has evolved from being a platform to stay connected with friends to being a place where people compete to have a prominent presence on the internet, which has caused many problems in youth. A large majority of people no longer interact with each other in the same manner anymore simply because they always have the idea of social media presence in mind. If you really think about it, it is almost abnormal for someone not to ask you for your social media username when they meet you for the first time; whether it be Instagram or any other social media platform.

A dating industry senior analyst, Caitlin Moldvay says that “Societally, we are going to increasingly meet more of our romantic partners online as we establish more of an online presence in terms of social media“.

A survey of 19,000 individuals married in the years 2005 to 2012 revealed that relationships that began online are more happier and less likely to end in divorce or splitting up. The findings of this survey are that 35% of these relationships which ended in marriage began with the individuals meeting each other online and 45% relationships began with them meeting each other on dating sites or social media platforms. In this modern age, with social media at flourishing as it is, meeting people and dating can be done with just the swipe of your finger (literally Tinder). According to a study done by Pew Research Center in 2015, about 75% of college students use Tinder and 80% of Tinder users are millennials.

All of these surveys and researches reveal that social media and dating sites contribute to a significant portion of the current age’s relationship “searching” tool rather than actually meeting people in real life. Everything from text, audio and video is shared through social media which almost eradicates the need for people to search for a partner in real life. Simply put, it is much easier to meet potential partners over social media and dating sites compared to actual real world interaction as one could walk past a person who 99% compatible with them but would never know it – but through social media he/she could look at their interests, their music taste, the movies they like and a whole array of information about a person(should they choose to reveal it).

In lieu of this, it is evident that in this digital age, most people prefer the convenience of social media and technology in the pursuit of a relationship, thereby creating a new social dynamic – a social dynamic where people are more inclined to meeting people online through the help of social media or dating sites rather than actually meet-meeting them, not only because it is easier, sure the convenience is a major plus point as people are just a literal swipe away, but also because relationships which start off like these have a higher success rate.

The firing of director James Gunn this past summer points out a unique capability of social media. In July, the director, who was slated to direct Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy 3, was removed from the project after some objectionable tweets came to light. The tweets, which were posted nearly ten years ago, contained inappropriate jokes about rape and pedophilia. Social media played a decidedly large role in this incident, highlighting a new usage of such platforms.

Although James Gunn’s tweets were inexcusably vulgar, a controversy was formed on the fact that it took place so long ago. After being let go, Gunn promptly responded with an apology, where he articulated that he was not the same person as when he posted the tweets. It’s impossible to definitively gauge Gunn’s level of sincerity, and perhaps that’s why social media’s ability to dig up the past is so troubling. Because Gunn’s words were the source of the problem, the credibility of his subsequent comments was damaged.

It wasn’t long before conspiracy theorist, Mark Cernovich, claimed responsibility for being behind the Gunn incident. Supposedly, these types of social media attacks on right-leaning public figures led him to employ the same strategy against politically left celebrities. Cernovich was quoted saying:

“I enjoy just the raw human visceral reaction of jumping into the arena and just swinging the hammer and seeing what is left over afterwards. Twitter is just modern-day gladiatorial combat.”

As he suggests, social media has introduced a new type of warfare. Social media creates a timeline of a person’s life on a scale that never existed before. Even the most careful record-keeping cannot rival the level of permanence of social media. Comments posted online are public and have a wide audience—unlike most personal records—so there is a higher number of witnesses, increasing the likelihood of those words being remembered and sometimes saved.

Additionally, no other documentation captures the minutia of day-to-day life. People tend to use social media in a way that reflects the now: how they’re feeling, what they’re doing, what they’re thinking about in the present. As a result, when used impulsively, social media can be a record of a person’s worst moments and, as Cernovich demonstrated, even when the comments are deleted they can be recovered. This ability to reveal the past can be beneficial, such as when it’s used to bring a criminal to justice, or it can be used for personal gain, like in James Gunn’s situation. Regardless of how we interpret these events, at very least we should be compelled to reflect on our own use of social media and the impact it has on others.

The #MeToo movement on social media always had a vision from the beginning- to address both the lack of resources for survivors of sexual violence and to build a community of advocates, driven by the survivors, who will be at the forefront of creating solutions to interrupt sexual violence in their communities.

In less than six months, the viral #metoo hashtag,led to a vital conversation about sexual violence that had been thrust into the national dialogue. What  started as local grassroots work had expanded to reach a global community of survivors from all walks of life and helped to de-stigmatize the act of surviving by highlighting the impact of a sexual violence worldwide.

Along with allowing a safe space for victims to open to up about their experiences,social media and it’s widespread influence also made notable changes in the workplace dynamic of multiple industries and companies.Before the movement was this prominent, the workplace dynamic for the accusers was characterized by the ignorance and the lack of explicit action on behalf of the coworkers. Social media boosted this campaign and in turn changed the mindset of the individuals within a workspace. Hundreds of tweets and thousands of instagram posts of survivors, led to a conscious effort on the part of the coworkers to identify any wrong doing in their surroundings and take justified action for the same to ensure that the victims have a safe space to work in. Justice and compensation was given in the form of the termination of the contract of employment of the accused or aid in the form of emotional therapy.

An example of this was the dissolution of the  ‘Phantom’ production house, which was a prominent part of the Hindi Film Industry.  One of the famous and strong voices who spoke against the accused CEO of the company- Vikas Bahl, was the actress Kangana Ranaut which led to the company ceasing their operations. Thus emphasising the function of social media and its effects on institutional spheres.#MeToo movement, being a campaign crafted on the infinitely expanding medium of social media, is able to have this prominent impact mentioned above.

The #MeToo movement garnered positive attention and led to the creation of multiple non-profit organisations that focuses on empowering silent victims of sexual abuse.

What has been more surprising is the support and trust that the readers place into the the victims story and believing it unquestionably.  Influential powers have also shown that the movement has spread like wildfire, making them take decisions that would determine the future of an industry as a whole as well as of an individual.

Rose McGowan is a sexual assault survivor of Hollywood’s infamous Harvey Weinstein. A traumatizing hotel room incident in 1997 caused her to obtain an influential voice in the matter, fighting for the women who experience sexual assault everyday. She shares her voice on many online platforms with Twitter being the major one (Chan). On October 12th 2017, McGowan tweeted about Weinstein’s maltreatment to speak out against the issue. Twitter then suspended McGowan’s account, with their reason being that she violated one of their policies by including a personal phone number in the series of tweets, as reported from The New York Times. After posting on Instagram that her account had been suspended, she called on her followers and anyone who wanted to join the fight to “be her voice” (Chan).  In this case she had no voice because of Twitter, so other women decided that they weren’t going to either. #WomenBoycottTwitter started trending on October 12th and the next day, Friday October 13th, women’s voices were silenced in protest against the platform (Zhang).

“Participatory culture”, defined to be “a range of different groups deploying media production and distribution to serve their collective interests”, is directly linked to fandoms as described by Henry Jenkins in his article “Why Media Spreads” (2). McGowan’s fandom, referred to as the “Rose Army”, was a force not to be reckoned with due to the power they held in circulating the same media, which was the thousands of posts using #WomenBoycottTwitter (Jenkins 1; Bonazzo). McGowan created a social dynamic from participatory culture that otherwise wouldn’t have been possible without the existence of social media.  Her voice on the online platform made it possible for people to come together in such large masses and stand up against this societal issue instead of shying away from it. There would be a definite lack of communication and numbers needed to speak out against people like Harvey Weinstein and to stick up for his victims without social media platforms like Twitter. In McGowan’s case, Twitter acted as a positive and negative factor. It gave a portal for people to share opinions and band together to start conversation but it also acted against that conversation. Twitter shouldn’t be silencing individuals who are creating conversation about serious issues of sexual harassment, especially in this day and age. Their response to the controversy was deceiving and lacked personal touch, like they copied and pasted it from their library of automated responses: “Twitter is proud to empower and support the voices on our platform, especially those that speak truth to power. We stand with the brave women and men who use Twitter to share their stories, and will work hard every day to improve our processes to protect those voices.” (Twitter). Twitter or any platform of social media may or may not attempt to protect the voices of their users but if they choose not to, they will face the forceful social dynamic of their own users in protest.

Works Cited

Bonazzo, John. “The Biggest Twitter Storms of 2017.” Observer, 26 December 2017, https://observer.com/2017/12/social-media-controversies-year-in-review/. Accessed on 1 November 2018.

Chan, Melissa. “Here’s Why Rose McGowan’s Twitter Account Was Suspended.“ The New York Times, 12 October 2017, http://time.com/4980004/rose-mcgowans-twitter-harvey-weinstein/ . Accessed on 1 November 2018.

Jenkins, Henry, Ford, Sam, and Green, Joshua. “Introduction: Why Media Spreads.” NYU Press, 2013.

Twitter Safety, 12 October 2017,                                                                                         https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/918502757102903296?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E918502757102903296&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2F4980004%2Frose-mcgowans-twitter-harvey-weinstein%2F. Accessed 1 November 2018.

Zhang, Laura. “Banning of Rose McGowan prompts a Twitter boycott by feminists.” The Independent, 13 October 2017, http://theindependent.sg/banning-of-rose-mcgowan-prompts-a-twitter-boycott-by-feminists/. Accessed on 1 November 2018.

In August of 2015, Kelly Osbourne, a co-host for the television show “The View”, aimed to call out Donald Trump on the issue regarding immigration and the racist comments he made. Her attempt failed miserably as she made the crude statement: “If you kick every Latino out of this country, then who is going to be cleaning your toilet, Donald Trump?” The comment was not well-received by her co-hosts as well as the show’s viewers and soon after, Twitter was flooded with infuriated responses to her comment using the hashtag #QueridaKellyOsbourne. Though shortly after the controversy Osbourne released an apology on Facebook stating that she misspoke, this social media event not only raises several questions about social dynamics between the citizens of the United States of America and immigrants but also about accountability of public figures making uninformed statements regarding race on social media.

In recent years, the United States of America has had an unstable socio-political climate with regards to immigration and there has been a great amount of discourse related to the Latino community and its impact on the economy. There has been an increasing amount of antagonization of Latino communities by anti-immigrants which has resulted in several hate crimes and racial profiling, physically and virtually. Social media serves as the primary medium for the spreading of information and in this age, social media can also influence how behaviours and interactions between social groups are spread. Osbourne’s comment magnifies this existing social dynamic since it is a prime example of how the rise of such views on social media platforms can create racial conflict. By reducing Latinos all over America to a janitorial status on live network television with a viewership of millions, Osbourne proliferates the idea that Latino immigrants are solely responsible for the lower job sectors and thus are not benefitting the economy. Though Osbourne claims to be liberal, her comment suggests that her ideologies are not in line with those of pro-immigrants who believe that immigrants are not just a small part of a larger labour force, but in fact in some areas of the country, they are the labour force. This reinforces a larger social problem of the financial superiority that white people have over people of colour in the United States of America, which is evident when a rich, white individual degrades immigrant jobs on national television.

Overall, this event not only reveals how there is a social conflict between immigrants and non-immigrants but it also displays how social media can magnify those negative behaviours. This controversy, more importantly, draws attention to how public figures on social media are responsible for the propagation of misconceptions regarding several social groups and they essentially are ‘spokespersons’ that can help determine social dynamics.

Works Cited:

“Kelly Osbourne’s Remarks On Latinos And Trump Stir Viral Response.” NBC News. N. p., 2015. Web. 7 Nov. 2018.

“Latino Immigration And Social Change In The United States: Toward An Ethical Immigration Policy On JSTOR.” Jstor.org. Davies, Ian, 2018. Web. 7 Nov. 2018.

“Search Twitter – #Queridakellyosbourne.” Twitter.com. N. p., 2018. Web. 7 Nov. 2018.