Definitions of things undefinable float freely through an atmosphere of opinions interpreted as fact. It's difficult for the working adult to separate opinion from fact because of time constraints and their obsession with living in the "real world." Those that have streamlined their reality to resemble a 40 hour work week with time for sleep and little leisure find it easier to avoid the task of organizing their value system. It's a good thing that we know that the majority of online content is not factual. Therefore, no value system is set in stone. Right?
Value systems are completely opinion based. This is not evident when looking at online comment sections where there is never a hint of neutrality. Approval or disapproval reign supreme as the two opinions on opinions; one opinion being content and the other being the comment. Rarely are people on the fence.
Abhorring indecisiveness is a part of the culture of efficiency evidenced in the existence of hyper- industrious individuals. As a society we idolize hard workers that never cease to produce content for our use. We witness and are affected by the reproduction of societal values by individual members of society that feel the need to promote certain values in exchange for nothing more than approval. This creates the commodification of values and entire value systems without needing to physically seek them out, or give them much thought. Every timeline or feed is packed with coded messages that reinforce outlooks and vie for a sort of cultural supremacy.
Very few people profit monetarily from online content sharing. Still, an exchange system exists in this world. We know the coin: likes, follows, retweets, favorites, etc. We are also familiar with the product: tweets, posts (like this one), pictures, etc. The existence of producer-consumer relationships are also evident in the exchanges taking place. What is most interesting about this topic is the circularity of content production and content approval. Most often, popular content finds a target audience that approves and reproduces said content in some form. This circular nature creates a reality with boundaries rarely explored beyond by content producer/consumers. No one builds an online experience that consistently makes them uncomfortable or disturbs their notions of normalcy and the right-wrong dichotomy (as I touched upon in the closing paragraph of this piece). Whatever is found beyond our online niches we don't reproduce, at least not in a positive manner.
It is because of the actions that stem from opinions that we never treat them as what they are: opinions. The social reproduction that takes place online should be understood as an exercise in solidifying the values of certain groups that deem it necessary to do so. This argument is not calling for the complete cessation of sharing content due to the outcome of sharing. Instead, it asks for reflection. Why does this picture belong online and not in a photo album? This question is to be specifically asked when it comes to content that serves no purpose other than the perpetuation of a lifestyle hoped to be unattainable at the moment by the audience it is intended for, or in search of approval. Try as you may the opinions posted online will not become facts if they are simply repeated enough. There will always be approval, disapproval and very little neutrality. The saying "Live and let live," is mistakenly thought to be directed at those that disapprove of the actions of others. I suggest this saying is meant for all parties involved, including those that promote certain definitions of happiness and success while knowingly and unknowingly disapproving of others.
Pity those that need the ruckus of applause to know they're alive when a beating heart would suffice.
- Alex Moran (@MoonbeanMarcos)
No comments:
Post a Comment