I think the answer to her question is somewhat apparent, it’s do both. I’m not a big believer in materialism or hyper-capitalism necessarily, but I feel like the motivation should be to build good ideas, whatever they may be, whatever priorities or ideologies they represent, and let the market decide what it wants.
What I think is especially interesting about this issue is that “social” networks that are made to connect people have actually been shown to make us lonelier (http://vimeo.com/70534716). It’s easy to think that loneliness equals laziness because we have all of these tools to bring us closer to our friends, but it can also do exactly the opposite when we are not with them. We constantly see all the things that we are NOT doing.
I think one of the issues that you are hinting at here seems to be that people are getting lazier when communicating face to face because we have been spoiled by the ability to say whatever we need to over texts, facebook messages, tweets, emails, etc. It’s easier not to introduce yourself to everyone in the room, so we don’t do it because social media has told us that it’s okay to keep your circle tight and only talk to people with whom your comfortable. Do you feel like that’s the case or am I doing what Oppenhimer/Hamilton were talking about when they were saying that we’re nostalgic for a time that never existed like we imagine it today.
One thing that’s interesting about that article and your corresponding post is how individuals on a team affect the team’s fanbase. This is much more true in the NBA than in baseball, football, hockey, or college sports. Maybe it’s because there are fewer players on a team in the NBA, but it is interesting how stars dominate a county’s basketball loyalties so strongly when if you look at this map of MLB fanhood by Facebook like (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2014/03/31/root-for-the-home-mlb-team-not-always/), it paints a very different picture. I wonder what this says also about the NBA’s personalities on twitter and what the league’s social media policies are versus the other sports.
I think it’s interesting that you highlighted all of the social movements on Facebook as being some of the most meaningful. I think Facebook has a ton of potential to fuel social change, but I also think that many people simply post about these topics for social capital and therefore promote the kind of slacktivism that our generation often gets criticized for. What are your thoughts?
I also think your comments about the loss of intimacy through Facebook are on point. That’s one of the hardest things about keeping in touch online. You have no idea how much attention the people you’re interacting with are paying to you and because your interactions with others are being mediated by such impersonal websites, it can be difficult to feel a “personal touch”.
Do you ever think athletes, or other celebrities for that matter, are criticized too much over what they post online? I feel like ESPN, Buzzfeed, Barstool, Deadspin, and every other sports blog is constantly ready to pick apart every single thing an athlete tweets about and it seems like they deserve the same amount of benefit of the doubt as anyone else. It feels to me like we often hold more distain for a misinterpreted tweet than a flagrant foul or brutal penalty, which has never made a whole lot of sense to me. We understand that they are human on the field (or at least most sports fans do) yet we forget that online.