Open books - Robert's first post

 In the past week, a fair amount of attention has been given to the rise over the last 15 years of social media. In particular, the rise of young people using social media has allowed for their lives to be as if they were open books; a day-by-day account of their beliefs, comings and goings, and what they are watching or listening to. The literature and video lectures I saw from Dr. Jose van Dijck in 2013 and Dr. Danah Boyd in 2014 is both timely and yet seem to come from a different time. Perhaps it is due to the growing prevalence of social media as political outlet, which back a decade ago was part of the spectrum of ideas yet not the only spectrum. One could even say that social media has come of age in the past 5 years, since the pandemic and its aftermath. I take a look at many of these sites and applications, and I begin to notice some patterns that come about. 

Facebook: This is one app that I use every so often. It is more an outlet for personal looks into family life and longer viewpoints of world events. Discussion is encouraged yet seems to be hardly used among many.

Twitter: I have the app yet have never posted. And for good cause, since the changes onto Twitter (or X) have been significant to merit distinctive periods of time when the app was for short bursts of human life events during the 140-character limit era ending in 2017; to where it is now a bastion of new conservative thought and, in my opinion, cosplaying radicalism. It has led to me to question the merits of unregulated free speech on a platform that seems like a free-for-all. This is especially true given recent events.

Instagram: The more fun and frivolous side of social media. It is really just people doing promotions and showing videos and pictures of their unique lives. It may be for the most part the one social media application that is an open book yet not as such open to political discussion.

YouTube: A video sharing platform that I have used for some commentaries in the past though not as much today. Once again, it is practically a free for all that can either be enlightening or irrelevant depending on what one is watching and commenting on. It also seems to be the most widely used social media app. 

Wikipedia: This application is social media by intent, in which anyone can edit or post an article. Nonetheless, the standards, while not to the extent of a peer-reviewed journal, are rather high given many other social media apps. I, for example, cannot readily post something or edit something without being part of a team approved by the Wikimedia Foundation. Many others are in the same position. I will day that Wikipedia has over 20 plus years' experience taken the reins of hardcover edition encyclopedia volumes like Brittanica and World Book. 

As I am getting older and having more outside world obligations, I do feel that the ideas and traits of social media accounts, along with related matters like financing and promotion, are becoming more of a younger person's game than how it was even 11-12 years ago when Drs. von Dijck and Boyd wrote their social media theses. As well, the lives of younger people have now been affected by technology more so than how it was when I was even a student at Hofstra University. Where this will lead in relation to library and information sciences is not ready to be determined. Although the adaptational process of integrating social media, new technology and communication with patrons have been able to move forward and successfully be initiated for many in the field. Perhaps others might look at this differently. Let me know by commenting below. Thanks for reading. More to come soon.