Further Discussion of Last Post: Facebook = TV 2.0 :comments

Posted by Hal
Tags: production, Video sharing, Voyeurism

A pretty interesting and healthy discussion broke out on my Facebook page yesterday, responding to my last blog post. I thought I’d reproduce it here and respond while I was at it. (My comments are new, added here, they didn’t appear in the original discussion.) And, hey, let’s keep this discussion going! I’m reprinting the comments in order, and using the initials of the commentators here, hopefully they’ll comment on the blog and identify themselves in full if they so wish. So here goes:

TD: I’m with you on many elements of your ‘peep’ thesis as presented thus far in other posts/forums, but “it’s still entertainment and distraction, not some newly evolved way to learn, connect and meaningfully interact” comes off as broad and gratuitous, a bit of overstatement for effect. For some types of use, you’re correct, but for others I’ve seen too much evidence to the contrary to agree completely. My ability to respond with the above, within the same medium, in context, inside an hour also does not remind me of television.

[Hal says: it’s a bit broad, true, and of course there are many exceptions but overall I’m sticking to my guns here: peep culture is replacing pop culture which means we’re deriving entertainment from watching other people’s lives, and FB is a big part of that. Does that mean that’s all we’re doing on FB and other peep sites? No. But it’s a big part of it and we have to acknowledge that. And interactive tv is already happening with more just around the corner as TV and Peep inevitably complete their merger.]

MS: The correlation between lower grades in TV-watching students and Facebook-ing students does not necessarily imply that the same factors can be attributed to the causality models. For example, both models most likely identify “distraction” as a factor that contributes to the effect of lower grades. But what are the other factors unique to the between Facebook and lower grades? I would suspect that they differ and that it would be quite interesting to analyze them on a deeper level. I think that a major divergence between TV and Facebook is the presentation of a narrative within a formally defined beginning and ending (even so-called “reality” shows are presented as such). Facebook is a never ending “narrative” that is not framed within any context. In addition, as TD points out, TV is passive (TV viewer) whereas Facebook is active (Facebook user). Therefore, the comparative influence of each medium on the grades of students’ must take these factors into account.

[agreed there’s plenty more to study.  we’re still trying to figure out the effects of television watching on kids, let alone the rest of it. love your point, MS, about the fact that FB and peep are never ending, unlike tv which at least has nominal breakaway points. ergo: peep is more addictive and fascinating and obsessive!]

MM: Whether passive or active, one thing the two mediums have in common is the mass communication of meaningless drivel: on that point, Hal, you are spot on in your analysis.

[thanks MM. but I’m not sure it’s drivel, or always drivel: it’s people – all of us – using the techniques presented to us, ironically alienating mass media type techniques, to try and announce the fact that we exist, have opinions and feelings, aren’t just statistics and net worths.]

TD: That could be said of the Internet as a whole (vs. a specific comment on social networking behavior). In fact, is the bulk of Facebook use even “mass communication”?

[it is…it’s one person communicating to many. how many? depends on # of friends etc. and, yes, it can be said and has been said and will continue to be said that the bulk of the content on the Internet is drivel…]

RS: absolutely! maybe worse ...cause when ‘working’ on computer you can Facebook without even noticing (like now!) but I’d never go up and turn on the tv.

[so very true…social networking and peep break down barriers which, again, is why it’s all so addictive: you are twittering and you maybe aren’t even sure if you’re twittering for work or for yourself or both at the same time…]

MM: TD, I think Hal’s thesis is that both mediums are more about “mass entertainment” and “mass amusement” rather than “mass communication”.

TD: As I’ve said, I agree in part (if by “both mediums” you still mean social media in particular). But is “mass” anything (e.g., audiences) a prerequisite for ‘peep’ to function? Hal? I swear I see it play out on a much smaller scale all the time, just as I also see social network interactions that I can’t dismiss as detached/pointless amusement.

[i think that, yes, peep functions only on an ‘mass’ scale which is not too say that every blog post and twitter gets a mass audience, but that anything anywhere has the potential to become mass entertainment on a massive scale. the prerequisite for something to be part of peep culture is, in my mind, that potential. and, again, it’s not at pointless, and, as with television, there’s more to it than just entertainment, but no matter what happens, those other elements are always a by-product of entertainment]

MM: I still think Hal’s thesis is spot on. Think about it: ppl on FB surfing each other’s status statements like they used to change channels with their remote control, seeking (i.e. peeping) whatever entertains or amuses? Moreover, the social contact between FB friends (unless based offline in the first place, or an anachronism, at best) hardly ever rises above that of superficial. How much more akin to TV can a medium get anyway?

[I’m with mm here]

TD: That’s just not my experience with the medium. YMMV.

[thanks everyone, great conversation, let’s keep it going!]

Comments: -21-, Add yours…

If one looks at these two mediums, objectively, one cannot help but think about Marshall McLuhan and his thesis: ‘The medium is the message’. Just as the television was a reflection of the “TV Generation” (passive entertainment, quick episodic imagery, brief attention spans, the Disney-ifcation of reality), so is Facebook a reflection of the generation now using it. While we can surely agree that most FB users begin their FB use (peeping) passively, it moves beyond the TV paradigm when they start to actively seek out others (and lifestyles) to peep on (and perhaps even interact with). From this perspective, FB is not only similar to TV, but an outgrowth of it as well, since both mediums are reflections of our own behavior?

By Mark McCawley on 2009 04 15

Thanks for your thoughtful reply to my comments. We should try and fly in the face of the assumptions that Facebook is a complete waste of time and engenders real discussion by using Facebook to engender thought provoking discussions about it as a medium that is, in fact, revolutionizing communication on multiple levels. I have to think about the Facebook TV relationship and post more.

By Margaret Santangelo on 2009 04 15

“I reject the argument that we’re becoming more social through social media.” Whose argument is that? I think it’s more of a clause in a more precise argument along the lines of “[People who have trouble interacting with others face to face] are becoming more social through social media.” The computer acts as a filter for people who are socially awkward in real life situations. It allows people to predetermine what they are going to say and the image of themselves they are going to construct/portray. It’s therefore totally awesome in that regard. It is still a medium that we screen ourselves through, so though it is immersive, it’s not transparent.

It’s an immersive, interactive form of entertainment, yes. TV - not interactive. What Margaret Santangelo says is pretty important. The fb narrative is always under construction, it’s always provoking user contribution, always stimulating user imagination. It’s therefore a creative activity. An unfinished art of which everyone is author…

I have noticed that you use fb as a marketing tool for your writing, Hal. Though you would be able to do the same on TV, it would not be interactive and you would have fewer freedoms in terms of multi-media forms of presenting your self-promotion.

Those people who left comments on your fb on this very topic seem like biggots to me. And hypocrites. “Meaningless drivel,” is what MM called TV and fb. It’s not meaningless if it’s fun! Fun is the anti-stress. Get with it guy. There is so much humour on TV and on fb: it’s pure performance. But pretentious people don’t get to enjoy it because they have a complex about being one of the general public. xoxo

By Natalie Pendergast on 2009 04 16

Hal, how often have we witnessed a “healthy discussion” turned meaningless by someone who reduced the discussion itself to “name calling” like “biggots”? In that manner, how more could FB be like TV? How often have we witnessed members of a TV panel do the very same thing? Obviously, when a person lacks the necessary intelligence to join a discussion, they choose to attack instead of converse. Again, Hal, this supports your thesis: just as common respect seems to be lacking on the TV medium, it also appears to be the same on FB. Perhaps my choice of words when I said, “meaningless drivel” was too incindiary; but how else does one describe a status such as this: “is painting my toenails?” Huh?

By Mark McCawley on 2009 04 16

I agree with TD’s description of mass communication. Fb epitomizes the post-modern era that we all thought was over and done with: A plurality of seekers trying to find ... something? Something unique to each individual or each particular audience? Same goes for video games. The narrative of a video game is partly authored by the software designer, and partly authored by the player. The personal narrative of each player therefore shares some themes, settings and experiences with all other players, given that the virtual world in which they are playing is stable and unchanging as created by the software designer.

However, each player’s avatar experiences this virtual world and all it has to offer in a different and unique way that is controlled by the player’s performance: decision-making, problem-solving, interaction, etc. And each player’s individual performance depends on his/her personal choices of how to behave in situations of combat, social interaction, and other challenges, etc. Therefore, no two gamers share the exact same narrative.

So, what does that tell us? It means that each story involves the ego and identity of the player. An avatar is a projection of one’s identity into a virtual setting. Each story is therefore pretty much only interesting to the player who co-authors it. Did you ever play Super Mario Galaxy on Wii or another single-user game like it with a bunch of friends, and find yourself waiting anxiously for your turn again? There’s a reason why it’s boring to watch others play: The game is not meant to be observed, it’s meant to be interacted with.

TV is meant to be observed. Large numbers of audiences can share the experience of watching shows or movies and their emotions/reactions are pretty identical and determined by the creator/writer of the show.

Fb, video games, transfictional literature are all meant to be enjoyed on an individual basis. The user is pretty much the only person who is really entertained by the interactive medium in question. Even those who like to live vicariously through their friends’ fb accounts because they are too shy to create their own are actually interacting with it and using this friend as an avatar.

I don’t really know what “peeping” is. It sounds cool though! Is it synonymous with the fb-coined term, “creeping”? As in, I “creeped” on Joey’s profile today to see what he was up to. He’s sooooo hot! If that is what it means, I think it goes both ways. I think there are facebookers who like to creep, while others like to be creeped on. Personally, I get a kick out of sharing links, news, photos, notes etc. with others.

Sorry this is so long, Hal. Sorry also if my intelligence is not up to snuff! Shoot! There goes my intelligence again, letting me down once more! I wish we were on a TV discussion panel right now so that we could all roll our eyes at appropriate times!

By Natalie Pendergast on 2009 04 17

You make excellent points, Natalie, especially the interactive nature of the FB medium (and the co-authoring of ongoing transfictional narratives), as well as the creation of individual avatars as one’s virtual identity (is anyone on FB exactly who they presume to be?).

Still,while FB is fun (why else would it be so popular), it’s also an ongoing social experiment in human interaction and behavior.

Sometimes I cannot help but wonder if we are all just white rats running around this virtual maze called Facebook.

By Mark McCawley on 2009 04 17

Totally. I agree that we are all participating in the evolution of social interaction. Even language is transforming because of texting, chatting and tweeting! : “i’ve been w8ting 4 u!” It’s crazy talk!

Thanks to everyone for this discussion: MM, MS, TD and HN. And I am sorry for that bigot comment. Now see, if this were taking place on TV, I would have to issue a formal apology and there would be all kinds of paperwork and red tape up to ying yang. Thank God for the facility of Internet communication.

By Natalie Pendergast on 2009 04 17

re: causality - if you postulate linear causality the issue is very different than if you postulate non-linear (networked or quantum) causality. Fascinating concept and how it plays out socially long term will be even more fascinating.

By len on 2009 06 02

It’s a fastidious and instructive article. Thanks for to apportion from you. Even I bookmarked this as advantageously for to get improve from it in incoming.

By runescape gold on 2009 10 14

Yup, that suhold defo do the trick!

By Velvet on 2011 10 17

That is a totally very good material authored right here. I appreciate your terrific content material. I ‘m composing a research paper with regards to governmental policies and your website aided a good deal. I’m a institution student and if you are in a absence of time I recommend highly to hunt help for Custom Book Report. Cheers!

By Writing services on 2012 02 10

A very nice post it is. I have been seeking this type of knowledge for a long time and by posting this article you have made my work so much easier.
montreal escort agency

By Mike on 2012 03 16

Mate, your images are excellent but the truth is definitely need to have far more content. Verify out quite a few of the Turnitin Safe Essay Writing self-employed internet writers on elance or freelancer.com there are numerous offers.

By Essays about Leadership on 2012 04 08

Your snap shots are first-rate. I enjoy the website content, it helps keep your readers hooked up to your blog site. I’m a university student and i’m right now flooded with term papers, professional dissertation help research papers, book reports essays papers and other jobs. I seriously want to compose my own works yet some guide is generally desired. I will work with solidwriters.com for my final buy dissertation project . I discovered them by way of google . Can keep you submitted on the outcomes.

By Thesis Writing Service on 2012 04 15

I have to say thanks to you with regard to your blog. You’ve plenty of engaging stuff as a result the website is valuable. I am a student in Georgia and I currently have an critical school assignment scheduled in the week. I’m caught up and have got writers-block for the time being as I am researching. Simply need another person to assist
me revise the cost-free article I stumbled upon over the internet otheelo: iago’s manipulation essay. That report fits my specifications but is authored in an unsatisfactory fashion and there are sentence structure blunders. Do you think I should proceed? Now i’m simply just in need of support, hence just about any hint will be fantastic.

By TimurHaut on 2012 04 17

Pal, I do think it is advisable to enhance your commenting extension. I really like your internet site but, have you thought about adding a disqus or commentluv extensions which as incredibly pretty. I have tried all of them and they’re first rate. I’m michael duivis Josh and I have essay topic research paper for school.

By Essay Topics on 2012 04 22

Your writing comments process appeals to a great number of spammers since your program is out-of-date. What you must do is bring up to date your cms or apply live journal and their own commenting plug ins which are fairly safe and sound. They do not let unwanted writing. I did that for my website and that aided. I am a student and I cheap essay to buy, then I compose essay papers and then publish them on my website.

By Reaction Papers on 2012 04 24

This stuff is very interesting and needed to be properly considered.
Bike Accessories

By Mark on 2012 05 03

  

The Bloggist

Hey, I’m Hal Niedzviecki. I’m a writer/thinker who lives in Toronto, Ontario, Canada with my wife and daughter. Up till now I’ve always considered myself a private person. But at the same time I’m fascinated by people who effortlessly open themselves up to the whole world. So I’ve… more...

Twitter

Ghostbuster zines from the Canzine Hollywood Piracy Zine Challenge are now online! http://t.co/RoAMEQTU

Hal Niedzviecki :: ·11:28AM

EXPOZINE 2011, Montreal’s 10th Annual Small Press, Comic and Zine Fair—http://t.co/3ISW3Ovx http://t.co/FlLfB6hk

Hal Niedzviecki :: ·20:02PM

Tag Cloud

 

Archive Months

February, 2011
January, 2011
December, 2010
November, 2010
October, 2010
September, 2010