These days, we are pretty desensitized to the wonder that is widespread internet access. Throughout the week, we check our messenger chats, post notifications and tap through friends’ stories hundreds of times. Social media has become so prominent in day to day life that much of the newer generations put major trust into its content – more so than what they hear on T.V. and read in the paper. The endless stream of content on larger platforms has made other forms of media consumption almost obsolete among the youth. And yet, despite this frequent usage, most of us hardly know the history and logistics behind society’s current favorite pastime. Lately, that blind trust has stirred up a lot of trouble.
Technically, social media is the culmination of websites and applications that enable users to network amongst each other. Looking back into the past, this way of human interaction is still very contemporary – now being labeled as “new” media. Predating the apps that we all know and adore today, their ancestors still bask in trailblazing glory: Radio broadcasting, analog and the telephone. This era is dotingly known as “old” or “traditional” media.
While certainly revolutionary in their own ways, humanity’s fundamentals of socialization prevail through our Facebook timelines and Instagram notes. Compared side by side, the contrast is stark, yet many similarities between old and new media remain. There is a striking difference, though: the anonymity and unaccountability granted to netizens by virtual private networks (VPNs) and cringey screennames, which more often than not come with an unwavering sense of entitlement. And, since their dawn, a damning characteristic of these spheres is their alliance with misinformation.
As everyone knows, these deceptive layers continue plaguing the internet to this day, which is why many refuse to source information through digital networking. Notably, generations that have habitually relied on old media for their information see it as nothing more than a hotbed for fake news and echo chambers. This is definitely reasonable considering the facts, but looking at the bigger picture, the belief that this is a novel vice turns out to be pretty harmful. Logically, the same could be said for verified news channels and other official outlets for unfolding events – all of which are susceptible to the same flaws. I’m sure quite a few of us remember our moms falling victim to those savvy Herbalife recruiters back in the day, and who can blame them? To be honest, those commercials were actually pretty enthralling….
Essentially, what we are saying is that there’s hardly any ideal way to source information, which shows why we should unravel this vilification. People should always be wary and check the sources of the media they consume. That being said, we cannot deny that, at the end of the day, social media remains a crucial way for users to interact and see perspectives from around the world, despite its current flaws.
The web is noticeably different from 20 years ago – riddled with constant spam, fake information and scamming methods – which is all the more reason to give new media the same respect as old media, which can be just as flawed. Eventually, it may give us the power to reclaim our wield of social networking tools. After all, learning how to counter these obstacles would definitely serve us better than fearing and rejecting them altogether.
Editorials represent the majority opinion of The Wolf staff and, therefore, remain unsigned. Any questions or comments can be submitted to Lisa Lacy’s mailbox in the main office or to [email protected].
