#7 DIGITAL MEDIA
3. How has Digital Media influenced (or changed) politics (election campaigning, public opinion, law passing)? Include a historical (before and after the digital media) and global perspective (include discussion of the US and at least two additional countries). Include whether the change has been positive, negative, or both. Support your discussion with reliable data.
Digital media has influence politics immensely. The most popular mediums from which people seek their news today are digital mediums. People are getting their news from television programming and the internet. On paper, we see that this has made it easier to get exposure to multiple perspectives on various issues, but when taking a closer look, it becomes clear that most people are selectively exposing themselves. People are tending to seek out sources that are like-minded and tend not to have well-rounded, developed conclusions because of their allegiance to like-mindedness. This can lead to people digging their feet in and having close-minded arguments discussing issues without a mutual interest in truth and accuracy, but rather loyalty. People who take a side of a debate online can have their views co-exist with others regardless of whether or not they’re founded in fact and logic; they’re given a platform and a voice where they previously would not have had such an ability. People can find other people who agree with them, despite neither being logically correct or well-informed, and this reinforce their ignorant positions. Digital media is being used in a way that further divides people politically.
Online news and social networking sites are being used in ways that are influencing today’s political landscape. Monathar Faraon, Georg Stenberg, and Mauri Kaipainen examined the differences in influence between online news (e.g New York Times) and social networking sites (e.g. Facebook and Twitter) on attitudes in political campaigns and found that “negative information from either type of media was more likely to change participants’ explicit attitudes in a negative direction and as a consequence also change their vote [sic],” (2014). Digital media is shaping people’s political attitudes and behavior, to the point of changing their vote. This wouldn’t be of particular concern if it wasn’t for the presence of misinformation, bias, and fake news in online news and social networking sites. Coming to a well-informed conclusion about political campaigns or politician isn’t the problem, but the quality of the conclusion users are coming to online is problematic. This is a problem in any democratic country that has internet access, not just the United States.
There is also a concern about people selectively-exposing themselves to like-minded coverage of news/politics in the digital age. Christiane Amanpour warned against the algorithms in social networks and internet use that reinforce selective exposure, saying that users are becoming entrenched in a cycle of like-mindedness and avoidance of opposing views (2017). Like-mindedness doesn’t necessarily entail correctness and neither blindness to bias nor adoption of misinformation is going to be a satisfactory adjustment to this new world of news. Glen Smith & Kathleen Searles found that opinion shows devoted the majority of their time to attacking the opposing candidate instead of praising the like-minded candidate and that exposure to opinion shows made viewers less favorable toward the opposition candidate and more toward the like-minded candidate (2012). Sunstein (as cited in Smith & Searles, 2012) stated that partisan news sources allow people to isolate themselves from contrary arguments. Mutz and Martin (as cited in Smith & Searles, 2012) say, “this selective exposure can increase hostility and polarization because neither side understands the rationale for opposing viewpoints.” We need to be critical of all these sources and not trust their information just because it aligns with our biases. We need to expose ourselves to sources that look at the world differently than we do, because if we don’t look at it from all angles, then we may be missing something. If we don’t adapt, then we can be deceived by simply appealing to our biases. This is a human problem and one that we need to adapt to together. We are all adopting these new forms of obtaining information and news and that means we all need to adapt.
References
Amanpour, C. (2017, September). How to seek truth in the era of fake news. Retrieved September 25, 2018, from https://www.ted.com/talks/christiane_amanpour_how_to_seek_truth_in_the_era_of_fake_news
Faraon, M., Stenberg, G., & Kaipainen, M. (2014). Political campaigning 2.0: The influence of online news and social networking sites on attitudes and behavior. JeDEM - EJournal of EDemocracy & Open Government, Vol 6, Iss 3, Pp 231-247 (2014), (3), 231. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.umuc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsdoj&AN=edsdoj.76fd62147b8843099311b6cd3c4c6c8d&site=eds-live&scope=site
Smith, G., & Searles, K. (2013). Fair and balanced news or a difference of opinion? Why opinion shows matter for media effects. Political Research Quarterly, 66(3), 671–684. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.1177/1065912912465922
5. How has Digital Media influenced (or changed) children of this generation? How are their lives different than ours? Include a historical (before and after the digital media) and global perspective (include discussion of the US and at least two additional countries). Include whether the change has been positive, negative, or both. Support your discussion with reliable data.
The children of this generation are growing up with new technologies. Children growing up with the internet and smartphones have been the subject of a slew of questions about the influences these technologies have on these kids. It seems that humans historically have worried about the direction that younger generations have gone in and new technologies have been present in many different points throughout human history. However, the recent technological growth may be more punctuated than ever before. Children are being given screens so that parent don’t have to parent, leading to distraction being emphasized over teaching healthy coping mechanisms. That distraction may be the center of the worry here. That distraction could mean a re-shaping of the average human brain moving forward. We may lose our ability to be contemplative and thorough. Beyond cognitive quality, researchers also have significant concerns about behaviors and psychological effects stemming from use of social media and the internet as a whole. Smartphones allow us to have the internet, and all that encompasses, in the palm of our hands (and our pockets) at all times. Children today are the first to have these technologies present throughout their development and that does not come without its psychological, social, and emotional ramifications.
Farahani, Alavi, Bafghi, Alamuti, Taghavi, and Mohammadi’s study of students in Tehran and Karaj, Iran showcased that narcissistic personality disorder, obsessive-compulsive personality disorder, anxiety, bipolar disorders, depression, and phobia could increase the odds ratio of internet addiction by 2.1, 1.1, 2.6, 1.1, 2.2, and 2.5 folds, that the odds of internet addiction for single persons were 20% more than for married ones, and people with personality disorders associated with low self-esteem and high impulsivity (Cluster C and Cluster B personality disorders) might be at special risk for developing internet addiction (2018). Considering that no causal relationships can be concluded from these studies, it is worrisome that either the internet is causing these personality disorders or it is important to emphasize careful internet usage and behavior for the rapidly expanding list of people who may be at risk of internet addiction. At the very least, this is reason to be cautious about children’s behavior with the internet. Pornography, social networking sites, and gaming are all mediums that children could use problematically and, at least, put them at risk for psychological, emotional, and/or social problems. This risk is not isolated to Iran. This is a global issue.
On top of that, there are concerns about the cognitive abilities of early adopters of digital media. Multi-tasking is becoming more and more popular now that people are spending time reading online with pop-ups and distractions all over the page and people can switch between tabs while carrying out a task. David Sanbonmatsu, David Strayer, Nathan Medeiros-Ward, and Jason Watson found that the people most capable of multi-tasking effectively are not the people most likely to simultaneously engage in multiple tasks, multi-tasking activity was negatively correlated with “actual multi-tasking ability,” and “people often engage in multi-tasking because they are less able to block out distractions and focus on a singular task” (2013). It would appear that multi-tasking isn’t as progressive and superior as the adopters would like to believe. Junco and Cotton (as cited in Waterston, 2011) reported that 57% of college students who instant message while studying report a detrimental effect on their academic performance. Teaching children the importance of studying without distractions may be essential to constructively adapting to the digital age. Waterston reported, “media multitasking clearly interferes with current task performance but also leads to higher distractibility and difficulty with task switching overall,” (Waterston, 2011). Children should be made aware of this fact and taught the value of being able to think deeply and pride themselves on being able to reject distractions. Any child in any country with access to the internet and or other sources of digital media is at risk of not being all they can be cognitively. Younger generations might say that the worry is steeped in a loyalty to tradition, but the research is there. It is simply a matter of listening to the evidence.
Children are at risk with the rise of digital media. Various mediums within the internet can lead to a slough of psychological, social, emotional, and behavioral problems. The trajectory our youth is heading in, in terms of distracted thinking and digital media usage, is troublesome and could result in a future that is without the ability to think clearly. One can only speculate what a future like this looks like, but we certainly don’t know that it will be better and there are quite a few signs that it won’t be in many aspects.
References
Farahani, M., Alavi, S. S., Mirzamani Bafghi, M., Esmaili Alamuti, S., Taghavi, Z., & Mohammadi, M. (2018). Psychological factors including demographic features, mental illnesses, and personality disorders as predictors in Internet Addiction Disorder. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry, 13(2), 104-110.
Sanbonmatsu, D., Strayer, D., Medeiros-Ward, N., & Watson, J. (n.d.). Who multi-tasks and why? Multi-tasking ability, perceived multi-tasking ability, impulsivity, and sensation seeking. PLOS ONE, Vol 8, Iss. 1, p E54402 (2013), (1), e54402. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0054402
Waterston, M. L. (2011). The Techno-Brain. Generations, 35(2), 77–82. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.umuc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh&AN=66815082&site=eds-live&scope=site
7. How has Digital Media influenced (or changed) the culture? Include a historical (before and after the digital media) and global perspective (include discussion of the US and at least two additional countries). Include whether the change has been positive, negative, or both. Support your discussion with reliable data.
Digital media is leading to more individualism despite its claims to be used for social purposes. People are walking around living in their phones and networks. There is less of a sense of community. People’s social circles are smaller and we’re being less open to new people in real life because they’re not part of our networks. Commercialism also influences culture, and that is becoming increasingly difficult to get away from when we’re always connected to the internet with our phones and just a notification away from having our attention snatched.
Lee, Choi, Kim, and Hong studied how culture affects users’ perceptions and beliefs after they have adopted information technology in Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan (IT) (2007). Lee et al. found that uncertainty avoidance, individualism, contextuality, and time perception had a significant influence on users’ post-adoption perceptions of mobile Internet services (2007). Individualism was found to significantly and positively affect users’ perception of usefulness, enjoyment, ease of use, and monetary value (Lee et al., 2007). Causal relationships cannot be drawn from this cross-sectional study, but it can be speculated that ITs could lead to positive perceptions of usefulness, enjoyment, ease of use, and monetary value in regards to individualism. Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong all being considered collectivistic cultures and showing this correlation with individualism is, at the very least, noteworthy. It would appear that IT could lead to individualistic thinking, even in cultures that are traditionally collectivistic. In addition to individualism, a tendency to monochronic time perception was shown to have led users to attribute greater usefulness, greater enjoyment, greater ease of use, and greater monetary value to the mobile Internet (Lee et al., 2007). Monochronic perception of time and individualism may be correlated with IT and mobile Internet, which may be viewed negatively within cultures that are traditionally polychronic and collectivistic. This could influence users’ tendency to fit the social norms of the cultures they belong to.
Lee and Vaught show that commercialism within culture can influence people as well (2003). Lee and Vaught assert that young women are vulnerable to racialized images of gender and sexuality, reflected in and promoted by dominant forms of popular and consumer cultures in America (2003). Lee and Vaught argue that American commercialism asserts whiteness in the dominant popular culture as what is good, with white families being portrayed as the normal American family and black families as either absent or dysfunctional and deficient, the ideals for women being blue-eyed, voluptuous, and thin with blonde long/flowing hair, women being shown almost exclusively as housewives or sex objects, (Kilbourne, 1995) (as cited in Lee & Vaught, 2003), the ideal man being an economically independent, strong, and tall white man, Asians and Asian Americans hyper-feminized and represented as exotic, submissive, and docile, including denying manhood, and denying ‘manhood’ to Asian men (Kilbourne, 1995; Espiritu, 2000) (as cited in Lee & Vaught, 2003). Studies like these are alarming about the influence that our digital media can have on culture.
Digital media could be influencing culture more than most realize. Not being able to see its influence might be a privilege on some levels. Not caring about it might be easier for those whom it does not affect, but for some people, its influence is pervasive. It could be shown to be a tool used in cultural imperialism and in the maintenance of a power imbalance in America in the name of profit. Commercialism is around every corner and able to get in direct contact at a whim with smartphones and IT are just as prevalent. Being aware of digital media’s influence on culture could be the difference between perpetuating systemic oppression and living in the American dream. It could be the difference between cultures surviving the test of time or being stampeded by the internet and left for dead. It is better to heed the side of caution than to regret not playing our part in this possible trajectory redirection in human history.
References
Lee, I., Choi, B., Kim, J., & Hong, S. (2007). Culture-Technology Fit: Effects of Cultural Characteristics on the Post-Adoption Beliefs of Mobile Internet Users. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, (4), 11. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.2753/JEC1086-4415110401
Lee, S., & Vaught, S. (2003). “You Can Never Be Too Rich or Too Thin”: Popular and Consumer Culture and the Americanization of Asian American Girls and Young Women. The Journal of Negro Education, (4), 457. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.2307/3211196
8. How has Digital Media influenced (or changed) interpersonal communication? Include a historical (before and after the digital media) and global perspective (include discussion of the US and at least two additional countries). Include whether the change has been positive, negative, or both.
Support your discussion with reliable data.
Interpersonal communication has been influenced by digital media in a few important ways. We may be becoming less social. Communication skills may not be developing as they should due to time spent online instead of time spent learning how to swim in the social world. We’re seeing people being less social since the birth of social networking sites, internet gaming, and other dimensions of the internet. The thinking involved in this behavior could be problematic if it leaks into users’ interpersonal communication, or reduces it altogether. People are becoming less social and worse at socializing due to their use of digital media.
Fiorenzo Laghi, Barry H. Schneider, Irene Vitoroulis, Robert J. Coplan, Roberto Baiocco, Yair Amichai-Hamburger, Natasha Hudek, Diana Koszycki, Scott Miller, and Martine Flament conducted a study on adolescents in Ottawa, Canada and Rome, Italy and found that when compared to other adolescents, a greater proportion of shy youth’s communication involving negative feelings and events occurred on-line (2013). Laghi et al. speculate that more socially-competent adolescents might sense that it is difficult to achieve precise expression of emotion on-line, which is relatively devoid of many of the emotional cues that might provide essential clues to meaning (2013). Either time spent on-line is leading to shyness and negative feelings or shyness is leading to time spent on-line and negative feelings. Either way, this relationship is potentially problematic in its potential influence on one’s interpersonal communication.
Aydoğan Aykut Ceyhan studied Turkish university students and found that in terms of basic internet use purpose the problematic internet use levels of the university students who “use the internet for entertainment purposes” and those who “use the internet to establish social relationships with unfamiliar people” were significantly higher than that of those who “use the internet to obtain information,” (2011). Ceyhan reported that this result points to the use of the internet for entertainment and social interaction constituting an important risk factor for the emergence of the problematic internet use symptoms (2011). Ceyhan speculated that youth with ineffective communication skills are more likely to prefer virtual relationships than face-to-face due to opportunities provided by the internet, to spend enough time on internet activities to avoid their inefficiencies in communication skills, and express themselves differently from whom they normally are (2011). Developing social skills is a challenge for everyone, some more than others. The problem with what is going on with digital media is that it is easy to hide behind the internet and avoid healthy social development if enabled to do so. It is ironic that people who seek out the internet for entertainment and social purposes tend to have social problems. At least while developing, it may be critical that time and activity spent on the internet be regulated to avoid unhealthy social development.
These studies were conducted in Italy, Canada, and Turkey, and all are cause for concern when it comes digital influence on interpersonal communication. However, that doesn’t mean the United States has nothing to worry about. Looking forward, this planet may have a generation that does not possess healthy or normal social skills because we’ve enable them to hide behind screens and the internet instead of being uncomfortable and growing into the social butterflies that they could be, or we can be proactive and acknowledge that this is an issue that needs to be taken seriously. Communicating effectively is not only important for the productive functioning of society, but it is also critical in appreciating life and the human experience.
References
Ceyhan, A. A. (2011). University Students’ Problematic Internet Use and Communication Skills According to the Internet Use Purposes. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 69–77. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.umuc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ919890&site=eds-live&scope=site
Laghi, F., Schneider, B. H., Vitoroulis, I., Coplan, R. J., Baiocco, R., Amichai-Hamburger, Y. Flament, M. (2013). Knowing when not to use the Internet: Shyness and adolescents’ on-line and off-line interactions with friends. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 51–57. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.015
