The Facebook Paradox
Social media has become a cradle of
paradoxes, lately. I remember an Abhishek Bachan advertisement, for a cellular
company, in which the Bollywood actor asks, do you have more friends in your
networking site than in real life?
If you have, then you must consider
yourself an addict of social media.
Fortunately, the ad did not work too long,
and many other versions followed this idea, perhaps, due to the slightly
disturbing fact that most of us do have more friends in Facebook or twitter
than in real life.
Before a decade, the general consent of
public was in favor of the rational thought that revolutions are a thing of the
past, and too romantic to be a twenty first century substance. However, the
Arab Spring and the Egyptian upraise proved this wrong. Facebook lead a very
important mission in these revolutions, other social networks also chimed in. Twitter,
Youtube, Google + and Linked In has initiated their own versions of something
that can be called cultural and intellectual revolutions.
Youtube made it possible to watch excellent
videos free of cost. Linked In made the notion of networking a household thing
among job hunters, and Twitter has a feel of simplicity and shortness. But Facebook
has what no one else ever thought of bringing into reality: magic.
Frankly, I do not know what I mean, here,
by magic. I do not, of course, mean the occult. I mean an indescribable fascination
that keeps our attention hooked. I wonder if one counted all the time spent in
front of Facebook pages, worldwide, that would make a light year or so.
Image Courtesy: Google |
Equally important are the benefits of using
Facebook—the promotion it is capable of giving to your books, and your other
social activities in the real world. After fifty years from now, take a census
and you will be surprised at the number of people whose destinies are
profoundly influenced by Facebook.
At the same time, how can one ignore the
paradoxes inherent in the site? “It is curious to observe how easily people are
attracted towards negative views and manipulated ideas in social media. It is
as if something negative satiates some inner urge. Gory and painful images,
nudity, immoral behavior and bad mouthing others get more “likes”, “shares” and
“comments” in Facebook.” [From: “Theme Based Writing: A Taboo?”]
A picture of a bloody accident, or
terrorist attack or naked woman or man, would get thousands of “likes”. I
always wondered whether these “likes” are consents granted by the visitor to a
particular page for showing that particular picture, or is it an appreciation
of the same. What are we supposed to understand, if the picture of a road
accident is given and thousands like it? Is it that they all liked what
happened or just liked the photography or liked what happened in other people’s
lives? Or is that I liked one of your pictures, it’s your turn to like mine, no
matter what?
The questions come and go. Answers never
appear.
Comments
Do these people even have a soul?