Marshall McLuhan believes that "the medium is the message." In other words, the methods with which one communicates with other people, whether it's face-to-face, a social networking website (Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, etc) or via text messaging/AIM, are simply extensions of who we are. I stated in a previous blog posting that a potential reason for Facebook's massive success is that it was more user friendly than MySpace and more "streamlined." It's almost like it's "MySpace done right." Most people go by their real name on Facebook compared to screen name-like names on MySpace. Additionally, Facebook users all have the same profile layout in terms of text font, color scheme, and where things are. MySpace on the contrary, gave its users much more freedom with music playing on the profile page, various background images and text font/colors.
There are two definitions of "whither." One is "to what place or state," as in "whither are we bound?". The other definition is "What is the likely future of," as in "whither modern architecture?" When the question "whither the individual," is asked, one is asking "what is the future of the individual?" It is often debated if users are expanding their identity and making it more public who they are, or if we are curtailing individuality by forcing everyone to conform to these social media standards.
I don't feel MySpace was that way and despite Facebook's more generic interface, it is still possible to personalize your profile if you have one. How is liking the pages of your favorite band, athlete, sports team, or television show any different from telling others than you are a fan of it? Furthermore, in earlier days of Facebook, you didn't "like" pages, you "became a fan" of them! Additionally, one is able to tell what religion they follow, relationship status, and political views they have. These are open, so you are not obligated to follow a organized religion. One can type in whatever they want. For example, if you are a huge fan of an athlete like Usain Bolt, one could list their religion as "Church of Usain Bolt" when they are in reality just a Christian. Sites such as Facebook simply make it easier to express one's individuality, they don't hinder one's creativity.
Another example would be YouTube. Some users use YouTube for illegal activities, such as uploading copyrighted content like TV shows, movies, and music videos for people to watch for free. Some professional musicians upload their own music. Still, a vast number of Youtube's users are amateurs who upload their own original videos. Some of these amateurs have become famous as a result of their YouTube pages. The most notable example is probably Justin Bieber, who for better or worse (depending on who you are) was signed to a record deal because he was noticed by an agent who viewed his YouTube videos. And after all of that, some user channels still are a mix of all of the above. Although the purpose is universal for all users (to upload videos), people are able to express their individuality in different ways.
However, I think . One of the most is that they're "Facebook official," that their Facebook profiles have been updated to say that they are in a relationship with each other.
I never really thought of some of your differences between Facebook and Myspace. It was interesting that you noted that on Myspace you use a username/screename for the site, while on Facebook, most people use their real names. I think there is a bigger sense of comfortability in giving out your name because it makes the individual feel that they are a part of something big and by putting their real names on the site, they try and get recognition for it.
ReplyDeleteIt is also interesting that you commented on Youtube as well. Much of the population does not realize that Youtube is a kind of social media site, but it really could be so. The sharing of videos and comments brings people together, for better or for worse. The issue of uploading copyrighted videos is a huge problem on youtube and as a bigger whole, the sharing of music online has become even bigger.
Focusing back on Facebook, you make a good point that there is more options to personalize Myspace, rather than Facebook, but you went on to say that this doesn't mean that Myspace helps express individuality more than Facebook. Facebook may have a more basic interface and less personalization options, but it contains so many different ways that help to describe what kind of person you really are; like you said, relationship status, religion, fan pages, etc.
I agree with your reasoning of why facebook is more successful than myspace. Facebook is certainly more user friendly and serves as a great way to communicate with friends, family and even sometimes business partners. It seems that nearly everyone has a facebook page these days and if someone did not have an account, they would probably feel left out. As you stated in your post the way facebook allows the user to customize their information including their likes/dislikes, activities, relationship status, what is on their mind, pictures, family members etc really in no way does the site limits one's creativity.
ReplyDeleteI have never really used Myspace but from what I hear it seems not as personable as facebook. Although a myspace user can customize and decorate their page more elaborately; my space is used more for talking about ones self and less about communicating with friends. That is what is so neat about facebook, it truly connects you with the people you want to be connected to. I believe that the invention of facebook changed the world for the better and only expands the way people can express themselves.
You tube is also a wonderful addition to social media. Like you said some celebrities have gotten famous through the site, such as Justin Bieber. Think about how famous he is today, without you tube that may not have been possible.