Identity and Information in the Internet Age
Today’s generation of kids and adults are dealing with technologies like no generation before. The major engine in this truly unique period is social media and the Internet. This has forever changed how we interact with one another as well as how we get information. We can interact with people all around the globe, with different cultures and nations, and do so all from our own living room. This new way of interacting with one another has had a great affect on how we form our self-identity. Social media and the Internet have made inaccuracies of information much harder to pass off because anyone can contribute. Social media has brought a new component to our identity formation because we now look outside and have more sources to incorporate into our identity than ever before.
The Internet and social media have together created an environment where information is readily available and shared than ever before. Whereas people used to have to find books written by experts for information, the Internet has turned information into an act of crowd sourcing. There are two different perspectives to see this — a good thing that more voices have been added to the chorus of information available, or as less rigorous filtering of information, leading to a lot of misinformation. Steven Johnson is one example of someone who finds the role the Internet plays to be disconcerting in the exchange of information. Johnson says in his essay, “There is undeniably a vast increase in the sheer quantity of pure crap, even when measure against the dregs of the newsstand and the cable spectrum.” (Johnson 470) His main argument is that amateurism, and the new platform that they are afforded, does not have the same burdens of proof that more professional outlets of information have traditionally had. He argues that previously experts had produced things where they were checked by a group of their peers with similar expertise. There was, therefore, always a certain measure of validity that work had to be measured against. This is no more according to Johnson, because the people themselves are now the experts (Johnson 471). He points out Wikipedia and blogs as a prime example of this. There is a certain measure of fact checking done on Wikipedia, and there is value to the crowdsourcing of collective knowledge to create bodies of information. However, it is also able to be changed by anyone; edited by someone who may not have the slightest inkling about the topic they are writing about. This brings high risks of factual inaccuracies.
Some scholars are convinced that the Internet provides a risky source of information. However, Johnson ultimately does seem right if one looks at the role of the Internet in facilitating misinformation. Venues like Wikipedia encourage regular people to engage with producing information. It calls upon people to produce information about topics that they may have learned and to create encyclopedia entries. There is a degree of self-editing in these discussions, too. Users can flag something that does not have a proper citation or that they find inaccurate and it can be either read with caution or changed by another user. However, there is not the same level of editing as something like an encyclopedia or an actual produced. There is no real way to make sure that someone has a background in the area that they are writing about, no way to make sure they have proper credentials to have an expertise in the subject matter. This makes it so you should be very critical of Internet information.
Social media brings even more of a risk to disseminate wrong and bad information. This is particularly true in the case of social media like Facebook and Twitter and the fasciation of memes. Many times people post pictures with captions, called memes. These often give information, quotes, or statistics, in quick readily digestible form. People are able to in a passing glance see a statistic about a political candidate and without context, can press share and disseminate this information without needing the information to be fact checked. This is particularly harmful in a culture that has increasingly less of an attention span and is more readily to believe things they come across in concise, easily recited memes, rather than having to do the reading to understand the full context of what they’re looking to understand. This means that a lot of people can just recall facts and information they saw, without fully vetting the information. For this reason, it is clear that the Internet, particularly social media, has created more information, but has not necessarily produced more quality and accurate information. Social media has created a lot of misinformation and people have to be careful to sift through the information that is presented to them.
However, this does not mean all information on the Internet is wrong and people can learn how to filter information that is likely wrong. One should not merely throw out the Internet as a source of information, but should meet it with rigor to try and understand whether the information they are getting is good and useful. According to the Virginia Tech library, there are common criteria to use when trying to decide whether a website is a reputable resource. The first is the authority of the publisher (“Evaluating Internet Information”). You can tell about this by looking through the website and then making a decision whether the person’s background entitles them to have an expertise and grounding in the field. According to the site, you can also look at the objectivity of the site, whether it is biased in presenting only certain points of view, and how current the information is (“Evaluating Internet Information”). This means that someone can filter out bad information, even if the Internet does provide a lot of inaccuracies.
Social media and the Internet also play a very important role in the formation of self identities. According to Brian Williams, social media has led to a celebration of the self that has put virtues of privacy and intimacy to the wayside (Williams 478). He talks about how people are constantly updating the world about their days, posting pictures, and using their social media platforms to express every little detail of their lives. In some ways, one could argue that this making people closer. The barriers that people usually put up by withdrawing into their private lives are increasingly being erased. Now people readily share their bad days, their problems with spouses, or even more personal matters like financial struggles. This is very true on social media and I think it is because there is a certain abstract distance placed between the person and the world they are interacting with. If someone is to sit at a dinner and tell someone about all of their problems, there are many conditions that make it more difficult. You have to look someone in the eyes, see their possible reactions, and then regulate your own emotions in the moment. On the internet, it has almost become like a diary of sorts. It is passive, but there is a certain feeling of getting something off one’s chest. It also allows people to feel like others are sympathizing with them through various expressions such as “likes” and other virtual ways to show sympathy. In this way, one’s personal identity is lost to a degree and they are able to enter into a more virtual and abstract space. However, one can also make the case that identity lines are made more clear by social media, it is just a new space to do so.
Another aspect of social media and identity formation are the barriers and divisions it can form between different types of people. Danah Boyd believes that this is not the case and that social media platforms like Facebook are actually reinforcing social barriers and stratifying how we interact with one another. She argues that even entering into social media is entering into a competitive market (Boyd 476). That is, people who are in school may be judged whether they are present on the new, best, forms of social media. She cites a fact that most people choose which competitive market they want to belong to base on the associations of their friends. That is the real engine driving one’s social media preferences are their real life associations. This means that social media is not a blank canvas where people can create their own identities, but one where people make decisions based on their circle of friends and who they hang out with. They are not neutral, as Boyd says, they are reproducing already existent social networks (Boyd 477). This does seem accurate, however, social media is slightly different because people can control how they meet others or are included in social networks. They are able to present their life in a controlled fashion through carefully constructed posts and pictures that convey their identity, how they want it to be seen by others. This is the paradox of social media. Social media, thus brings up a lot of new complications in how we form our identity.
Psychologists have looked in detail just how social media and the Internet is affecting our identity and have found many profound ways that it does so. A working definition of a self-identity, according to psychology is “how we define and see ourselves as unique individuals.” (“Technology: Is Technology Stealing our (Self) Identities?”) We can gain this sense of identity in two main ways, a self awareness and how we translate the outside world’s perceptions about us. Self-awareness, the first of these two, is the observation of our feelings, behavior, experiences and goals. According to Jim Taylor, a psychologist, technology has driven a major change in our self-identity is that it has transformed from something that was primarily internally driven to now being externally driven (“Technology: Is Technology Stealing our (Self) Identities?”). Also, the external world has been expanded in unprecedented ways because we are no longer bound to our neighborhood, family, or people within a physical proximity. It is now virtually limitless. According to Taylor, the way we used to understand ourselves using our own perceptions has been dramatically overshadowed — the outside world causing a “deafening roar.” (“Technology: Is Technology Stealing our (Self) Identities?”) This has radically shifted how we come to understand ourselves.
The major influences on people’s identity formation has changed due to social media. People who lived before social media were generally influenced by the things directly around them like parents, peers, schools, and the community. In many ways this was a circular process. We were part of this community, whether it be our family or a more expanded community, and we helped create it. We were also a reflection of it. We would take the ideals of the community around us and incorporate them into our identity. Thus, we were influenced by the world around us and incorporated these values into our own identities and then interacted with our community. However, now young people’s identity is disproportionately formed according to external factors. One major way is that we are constantly inundated with and experience pre-packaged notions of who popular culture wants us to be. These packages tell us exactly what we should believe about ourselves, how we should look, and a variety of other things that are seen as socially attractive. Social media and the Internet have put our experiences of these idealized selves on a whole new level. This always existed to a certain level within communities, but it was much more specific and personalized.
Another major psychological effect in identity creation due to social media is how we express our identity. Now we are more conscious than ever not just about what we are feeling, but how people will perceive us. We want others to see us in a positive way, and we measure how they present themselves, as well. So our self-identity is no longer much of an internal process of knowing thyself. Many people use social media not just to express themselves, but in order to gain popularity and self-esteem through what they post. This is why, according to Taylor, “We come to see our identities as those we would like to have or that we want people to see rather than who we really are.” (“Technology: Is Technology Stealing our (Self) Identities?”) In this way, we are actually sacrificing our real self-identity in favor of striving to find an identity that is acceptable to others. This has always been done to a degree, as we were always interacting and shaping ourselves according to people around us, but this has been expanded so much that it’s different. We do not just see the family next to us, but see thousands of friends in the space of one window, measuring ourselves constantly. The real affect of how this will make people different isn’t fully understood, but there should at least be an awareness that people are forming their identities in a new way because of social media. This also brings up the interesting question of whether there is actually a more authentic version of self-identity. Taylor and others make it seem like the Internet is alien to the human experience, but other aspects of interacting within modern society are not. However, even the products of modern society are particular to certain cultures and other technologies. This could be applied to any new technology. Cars and the invention of the automobile would also have an effect of shrinking communities and distances between towns and cities. The phones also would have changed how we communicate with one another over letters. This is not to say that social media isn’t different, but that we should be careful about presupposing that there are more natural forms of self-identity than others. But to be sure, the effects of social media are greatly felt, particularly by those who are still coming of age in this new environment.
Social media can affect different groups differently. People who are older and just now experiencing the influx of social media have already created their identities. They encounter social media as a less fluid person because they have already accumulated a sense of self through years of life. The group most affected by the changes are teenagers. This can be good, helping teenagers form connections, associate with like minded groups, and pursue interests. However, there are also cases where it can compound the normal struggles of being a teenager. In order to demonstrate this, there is an interesting case study of a British 14-year old’s experience that shows just how tricky navigating social media can be for teenagers, especially those with self-esteem issues.
The story of Hannah Smith highlights some important features of the struggles of teenagers in the age of social media. In 2013, Hannah Smith, a 14-year old from the UK, went on a popular social media site for reassurance (“Growing up Digital”). She was studying for exams, and stressed and opened up about her feelings on her social media site. Immediately she received a bunch of negative feedback. People were telling her she was ugly and that she would kill herself. A month later, she did just that, and killed herself. Her parents blamed the anonymous comments found on the site for pushing their daughter to commit suicide. The very disturbing and odd part about Hannah’s case is that she actually sent some of the hateful messages to herself, hoping that her friends would come to her aid and defend her. This brings up the key role that social media plays in the lives of teenagers today: as a means to get identity validation from friends or strangers. We have always sought validation from others, but one could argue that the anonymity aspect of the Internet and social media makes it truly different. Whereas in the past, if we wanted to say something mean, we would have to look at the person, feel the weight of our words and be deterred by emotional responses, this does not exist anymore. People can hide behind their keyboards and say very hurtful things to people and not feel the same palpable emotional connection that they used to.
Social media has a very big effect on how teenagers come to understand themselves and others. According to one psychologist, Catherine Steiner-Adair, says that this outside affirmation is having a very big effect on how teens today form their identity (“Growing up Digital”). At this stage in one’s life, it is absolutely paramount to get validation and affirmation. Normally, people would be in school around their peers and seek this validation, but now people go on their social media accounts and there is a much more anonymous aspect of the feedback. People are able to broadcast everything they do and encounter others doing the same that people of a generation ago would not have dealt with. This is also exasperated because teens are increasingly spending more and more time online than ever before. The other issue, according to psychologists, is that people often see their real and virtual identities as identical (“Growing up Digital”). Teens do not have a fully developed brain yet can they do not have the same impulse control to understand the ramifications of their words online. When people want feedback on their lives and there are a lot of people without developed impulse control trying to hurt the person, this can have a very bad and real effect on their identity. One media theorist has called this process “digiphrenia,” or when people try to exist in more than one incarnation of themselves at once (“Growing up Digital”). Furthermore, people constantly carry these digital identities with them, on their phones and portable devices, making the two different selves very melded and interchangeable. The recommendation is that parents take an active role in their children’s digital life.
In sum, the role of the Internet and social media in identity formation is very complicated. People are interacting with a new world; a vast new network of people and communities that would have never been possible. This is particularly true of teenagers and other age groups who have not fully formed, their identity and interactions with the world yet. The real question for the future will be to what degree will this change the experience of what it means to be human. As people continue to augment reality with ways to blend the virtual and the real, the line will continue to grow thinner. People will be faced with an unprecedented level of digital content that overlaps and even replicates their experiences of reality. This will have an effect on global communication, where people can form their identities in reference to other cultures and communities in unprecedented ways, as well. This may just make humanity a different community altogether, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but will need to be grappled with in order to make sense of a different world with different technologies.
Works Cited:
Boyd, Dana. “Implications of User’s Choice.” Signs of Life in the USA: Readings on Popular Culture for Writers. Ed. Sonia Maasik and Jack Solomon. New York: St. Bedford, 2012.
"Evaluating Internet Information." Evaluating Internet Information. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Aug. 2016.
"Growing up Digital: How the Internet Affects Teen Identity." Deseret News National. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Aug. 2016.
Johnson, Steven. “It’s All About Us.” Signs of Life in the USA: Readings on Popular Culture for Writers. Ed. Sonia Maasik and Jack Solomon. New York: St. Bedford, 2012.
Taylor, Jim. "Technology: Is Technology Stealing Our (Self) Identities?" Psychology Today. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Aug. 2016.
Williams, Brian. “Enough About You.” Signs of Life in the USA: Readings on Popular Culture for Writers. Ed. Sonia Maasik and Jack Solomon. New York: St. Bedford, 2012.
