Social Media Activism

The internet has propelled many socially progressive movements forward, as internet activism rises (Collar, 2018). The #MeToo movement, founded in 2006 to help survivors of sexual violence, was re-ignited and amplified across social media after numerous sexual allegations were made against Harvey Weinstein (Me Too, 2018). This encouraged women to speak up regarding sexual assault and, as The Guardian reports, resulted in many famous aggressors’ exposure and reprimand.

The internet has also sparked connection amongst people oppressed by their governments. The Egyptian revolution was named the ‘Facebook Revolution’, as the online platform considerably helped revolutionaries to topple Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak (Vaidhyanathan, 2018). In addition, climate activism and movements such as ‘Black Lives Matter’, amplified across social media, has allowed a diverse global population to connect with, educate and understand one another, as they fight for progression (Valenzuela, 2013).

55% of young adults in the UK believe social media encourages social change offline (Krasodomski-Jones et al, 2018). In ‘Alone Together’, Turkle argues the network prepares us for relationships and connections with less quality however, she fails to acknowledge the power of the internet to bring society together for the greater good (Turkle, 2017).

Personal Relationships

As stated in my previous blogposts, I agree the internet forms a distraction in human relationships, resulting in their downfall; as Soule reports. My peer Heyitssunny also discusses her personal experiences of such. However, there are instances in which the internet can be used to preserve and outline the importance of human connection.

Thoraya Maronesy is a Youtuber that dedicates her channel to “interactive projects with strangers”. Thoraya creates videos, such as the above, that focus on real human connections as she encourages her participants to foster and ignite their own. Like Turkle, I fear the internet will result in lower quality relationships as we give them less attention. I therefore really enjoy Thoraya’s videos and find her use of technology to spread such a meaningful message very refreshing.

Even if we don’t use it to it’s full meaningful potential, as Evangelical Focus report Dimitrios Tsivrikos suggests, the internet provides us with means to maintain our connections. Facetime, for example, allows me to stay connected to my family living far away. Facebook and other social media has also allowed me to stay connected to people I hold close.

Turkle asks if technology serves our human purpose. I believe if it is used in moderation, as a tool rather than as a limb we depend on, it does; as it allows us to initiate social change and remain educated and connected.

I recognise the internet does not come without it’s dangers to human connection, however to prevent ruining our connections, Turkle stated in a Ted Talk, that we must “find the ways technology can lead us back to our own minds, our communities and our planet”. If we can do this and place meaningful connection at the heart of our technology use, I believe human connection could be truly positively re-invented and, potentially, stronger than ever.

Word Count: 539

References

Collar, A. (2018). The internet: Can it really influence social movements? — Global Social Challenges. Retrieved 8 January 2020, from https://sites.manchester.ac.uk/global-social-challenges/2018/06/17/the-internet-can-it-really-influence-social-movements/

Krasodomski-Jones, A., Oliveira, M., Chauvet, A., & Glover, B. (2018). Plugged In: Social Action on Social Media [Ebook] (1st ed.). Demos. Retrieved from https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Plugged-In-Final-Report2.pdf

Me Too. (2020). About — Me Too Movement. Retrieved 8 January 2020, from https://metoomvmt.org/about/

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other (3rd ed., pp. 1–346). New York: Basic Books.

Vaidhyanathan, S. (2018). Anti-Social Media : How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Valenzuela, S. (2013). Unpacking the Use of Social Media for Protest Behavior. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 920–942. doi: 10.1177/0002764213479375

The internet gives us a platform where we can construct our identities, manage our relationships and communicate as we please (Turkle, 2017). It’s arguable we have more control online in these aspects than off, but is it giving us too much control? Does it take away the authenticity of human experience?

Social Media and Manipulation

There are 3.48 billion active social media users in the world, 67% of the UK population contributes to this (Battisby, 2019) (O’Dea, 2019). We constantly construct our identities online as we build our profiles and engage in activity. Turkle highlights, this connectivity allows us to experiment with our identity, though our presentation here is often just a “fantasy of who we want to be” (Turkle, 2017, p. 153).

Social media influencers acquire followings as popular internet personalities. However, the authenticity behind them and their constructed narratives is questionable. For example, Emily Canham, a successful YouTuber, admitted to falsely presenting her relationship online. Essena O’Neil, a Vegan Youtuber, also took social media by storm as she announced she was leaving YouTube, to lead a more genuine life offline. The Guardian report; Essena stated “online it looked like I had the perfect life, yet I was completely lonely and miserable”. This displays the internet’s capacity to facilitate identity and situation manipulation.

Online Self Surveillance

As CNN report, ‘Cancel culture’ refers to an audience shaming an influencer, in response to their wrong-doing, in an aim to diminish their significance. This has lead to increased self regulation amongst bloggers, as they strive to be politically correct and family friendly; fearing for their online careers and popularity, bringing their genuineness into question. However, many of us self-regulate online. Have you ever deleted posts out of fear your employer may dislike them? I know I have! In fact, 74% of young adults in the USA have too (Smith, 2013)

Turkle describes social media as an “architecture that encourages self surveillance” here, as she likens it to Bentham’s Panopticon Prison (Turkle, 2017, p. 262). In the Panopticon Prison, as you can see above, a watchman lays in the central tower, surrounded by prisoner’s cells. The watchman is able to see all prisoners, though they are not able to see him, so must assume they are always being observed; resulting in self surveillance (Vaidhyanathan, 2017). This creates a surveillance state, becoming an ever-more apparent reality in the modern age of digital technology and social media, as McMullan reports and Siva Vaidhyanathan illustrates in his 2018 book, ‘Anti-Social Media’.

Controlling Communication

Control can also be maintained in online communication with friends and family. Here, we choose exactly what we want to give, as Turkle likens us to modern day Goldilockses; putting people “not too close, not too far, but at just the right distance”. Turkle found many people actually prefer digital communication to in-person or phone conversations, as it allows them to keep people “at bay” (Turkle, 2017, p. 14).

Like Turkle in the video above, I am concerned the control the internet provides us with, in all aspects, strips away what it means to be human, to be messy and to learn, particularly in our relationships. The online world may provide us with comfort as we exercise control, but this doesn’t reflect our realities. “It’s when people are vulnerable and hesitate, that they often reveal the true parts of themselves” and I think we should embrace that (Huffpost, 2016).

Word Count: 562

References

Battisby, A. (2019). The Latest UK Social Media Statistics for 2019 — Avocado Social. Retrieved 6 January 2020, from https://www.avocadosocial.com/latest-social-media-statistics-and-demographics-for-the-uk-in-2019/

O’Dea, S. (2019). Total number and the share of population of active social media and mobile social media users in the United Kingdom (UK) in January 2019. Retrieved 6 January 2020, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/507405/uk-active-social-media-and-mobile-social-media-users/

Smith, C. (2013). Three Out Of Four Young Adults Delete Social Media Posts Over Fears They Could Harm Their Careers. Retrieved 6 January 2020, from https://www.businessinsider.com/young-adults-delete-social-media-posts-2013-8?r=US&IR=T

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other (3rd ed., pp. 1–346). New York: Basic Books.

Vaidhyanathan, S. (2018). Anti-Social Media : How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Internet Use

As you can see above, internet use has significantly increased over the years, particularly amongst older age groups. In 2018, 95% of adults in the UK were recent internet users (Prescott, 2019). It was found that 78% of adults here own a smartphone, and, on average, check them every 12 minutes, as 64% state they “need and expect a constant connection” (Ofcom, 2018, p. 1).

Although I don’t like to admit it, I fall into the above categories. The internet is my source of knowledge and connection, particularly as a student. As Frangoul reports, the internet has revolutionised our lifestyles, from education to business and dating to travel. Due to this, we feel the need to be constantly connected. Turkle believes “anxiety is part of the new connectivity” here, as we use the network as a place for hope (Turkle, 2017, p. 242).

Consequences of Internet Use

As you can see above, people respond to being disconnected differently. Anxiety is not just present as one is offline and feels the need to be connected, it can be experienced as a result of feeling too connected, too. The digital detox trend indicates this. A digital detox means removing all digital traces from one’s life periodically, to refocus on their physical reality.

Dr Sally-Ann Law, a psychologist and life coach, explains to The Telegraph that, in completing a digital detox, one will “gain back hours of time to do things considerably more meaningful”, refreshing their mental state. In addition, digital marketing Guru, Tania Mulry, states in a Ted Talk, that completing occasional digital detoxes will help us “master technology before it masters us”.

Being online is addictive. As we receive notifications, dopamine is generated within us; a hormone lighting up our pleasure centres. The more we receive this rush the more we become dependent on it, which is why it hard to disconnect. However, technology forms a major distraction in our lives here (Clarkson, 2017).

Spencer Palmer Christensen found the more time a person spends on social media, “the more likely their emotional well-being” will decline, “negatively impacting their relationships” due to “distraction, irritation and decreased quality time” spent together (Christensen, 2018, p. ii).

As Acharya Keshab outlines in her review of ‘Alone Together’, Turkle is not anti-technology however, her concern lays in the maintenance of human face-to-face relationships. I too am concerned here, that we may neglect human connection in exchange for technology.

Although the internet is a useful tool in the navigation of daily life, we must use it in moderation to avoid self-destruction, as outlined above. After delving into this topic, I want to start practising living offline more and reconnect with the realities surrounding me. What do you think? Leave it in the comments below!

Word count: 505

References

Christensen, S. (2018). Social Media Use and Its Impact on Relationships and Emotions [Ebook] (1st ed., p. ii-3). Provo: Brigham Young University. Retrieved from https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7927&context=etd

Clarkson, N. (2017). This is What Happens to Your Brain When You’re Always Online. Retrieved 6 January 2020, from https://www.virgin.com/entrepreneur/what-happens-your-brain-when-youre-always-online

Ofcom. (2018). A Decade of Digital Dependency. Retrieved 6 January 2020, from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/features-and-news/decade-of-digital-dependency

Prescott, C. (2019). Internet users, UK: 2019. Retrieved 6 January 2020, from https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/itandinternetindustry/bulletins/internetusers/2019

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other (3rd ed., pp. 1–346). New York: Basic Books.

Medical Robots

Paro is an interactive robotic seal, used in therapy for dementia patients. Paro has sensors enabling it to respond to physical touch and is able to alter it’s behaviour depending on patient’s reactions to it. Paro has been found to “reduce patient stress” and improve their motivation. A user’s son told Turkle, Paro “made walking out so much easier” when visiting his mother at the hospital (Turkle, 2017, p. 124).

The question here is, should it feel easy? Although I can understand that the son felt his mother wasn’t alone in Paro’s presence, she was; at least with regards to living company. In a TED talk, Turkle stated, as per the title of her book, that as technology develops, we expect more from it and less from each other; betraying ourselves and our human connections as a result (Turkle, 2017). Perhaps Turkle’s sentiments ring true here.

Seniors account for over 25% of Japan’s population, but with an underpopulated medical workforce, robot nurses have become increasingly used in Japanese elderly care (Kyodo, 2019). The RIKEN-SRK Collaboration Centre released a series of nurse robots from 2009; Riba 1, Riba 2 and Robear. They were the first of their kind to physically move patients from beds to wheelchairs and to help people stand, as seen in the video above. Stuart Dredge reports, Riken’s motivation was to improve nursing and relieve the burden on care-givers.

Ethical Issues behind Robotic Care

Locsin et al argue a robot’s programmed performance of human care is sufficient; though, like Turkle, I’m not persuaded (Locsin & Ito, 2018). Stahl & Coeckelbergh reflect my concerns as they state robot nurses cannot give the same quality of care as human nurses due to their lack of emotion and moral agency. Robots are also unable to make ethnical decisions using reason, which can be dangerous as unexpected medical issues arise in patients (Stahl & Coeckelbergh, 2016).

Furthermore, robot medical companions, such as Paro, may present a “safe haven in an unsafe world” deceiving it’s users (Turkle, 2017, p. 66). Here, robots are presented as something they are not, pets, encouraging emotional involvement from vulnerable patients. Ethics of deception come into question here (Stahl and Coeckelbergh, 2016).

I believe placing human health and the vulnerable in artificial hands, is a dangerous move. Although I acknowledge robots’ practicality, I believe the risks and unresolved ethical issues outweigh the benefits. I am also concerned that human connection may suffer as robots are increasingly turned to as a viable solution.

In his review of Turkle’s first edition of ‘Alone Together’ (2011), Rafael Behr highlights the “alarming revelation” of our close proximity to putting this robotic effect into “mass consumption”. Tanioka’s predictive timeline states that by 2025 “articifical super intelligence will supass human intelligence”, legitimising the use of robots in the medical field (Locsin & Ito, 2018, p. 146). As we appear to be on the road to robots participating as authoritative figures, I wonder what other areas of life they may take precedence in. Time will tell …

Word count: 538

References

Kyodo. (2019). Elderly citizens accounted for record 28.4% of Japan’s population in 2018, data show. Retrieved 26 December 2019, from https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/09/15/national/elderly-citizens-accounted-record-28-4-japans-population-2018-data-show/#.XgS8tS2cYnV

Locsin, R., & Ito, H. (2018). Can humanoid nurse robots replace human nurses?. Journal Of Nursing, 5(1), 1. doi: 10.7243/2056–9157–5–1

Stahl, B., & Coeckelbergh, M. (2016). Ethics of healthcare robotics: Towards responsible research and innovation. Robotics And Autonomous Systems, 86, 152–161. doi: 10.1016/j.robot.2016.08.018

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other (3rd ed., pp. 1–346). New York: Basic Books.

Artificial intelligence facilitates artificial emotion; machines expressing things “considered feelings if expressed by people”. Although robots don’t feel, they perform connection, leading humans to experience emotion towards them (Turkle, 2017, p. 63).

The Formation of Emotional Connection

In 2017 The Washington Post reported a colonel in the US military called off an operation in which robots were used to identify and activate mines; as he experienced guilt when they were blown up (Ted, 2018).

Humans treat robots as though they are alive because we are “biologically hardwired to project life onto autonomous movement in our physical space” (Ted, 2018, 3:18). We carry similar moral sentiments towards pets as we do robots, resulting in the formation of emotional attachments here (Cheok & Zhang, 2019, p. 6).

Turkle states it is the mutual reciprocation of feelings that allow people to connect; leading to psychological risk in unreciprocated robotic attachment. Here, Turkle believes humans “cheapen the notion of companionship to a baseline of” interaction as opposed to connection; reducing the quality of their relationships (Turkle, 2017, p. 55).

The Manifestation of Emotional Connection

Otome is a virtual dating game in Japan where over 40 million players seek romance from virtual partners; indicating romantic needs can be satisfied through computers (Cheok & Zhang, 2019). The film ‘Her’, directed by Spike Jonze, takes this notion further, as a writer develops a romantic relationship with his attentive AI voice assistant (IMDB, 2019). Albeit fiction, it is not far from today’s reality of robots filling human voids (Velez, 2015).

Interestingly, establishing human connection forms a similar process to technological connection. We are introduced, we adapt, we integrate and we feel; but could humans really feel for robots as they do for each other, as outlined in the Jonze’s film? (Cheok & Zhang, 2019).

Samantha, designed by Ergie Santos, is a sex doll covered in sensors, allowing her to intimately respond to her user; take a look at the video above in which Samantha and her creator are interviewed. Robinson reports Samantha’s users are falling in love with her as, in their book ‘Robot Sex’, John Danaher and Neil McArthur state such robots can be positive as they promote pleasure however, I’m less convinced (Danaher, McArthur, 2017). Mehrabian found only 7% of human communication accounts for language, suggesting many important elements of communication in human relationships are absent here (Mortensen, 2017).

My peer, Limeade, highlights in their blog post that AI provides those ostracised from society or unable to engage in human relationships, with the important opportunity to experience connection with an ‘other’. Limeade points to a need for understanding here.

David Levy states as attitudes to unconventional love evolve, human-robot relationships may be increasingly accepted (Cheok & Zhang, 2019). However, Turkle states “sociable technology will always disappoint because it promises what it can’t deliver”; real unperformed connection (Turkle, 2017, p. 101).

Robotic intimacy leads me to question why human connection isn’t enough. Like Turkle, I believe robotic relationships threaten and demean the essence of intimate connection. I believe the expansion of this phenomena will lead us to increased seclusion in our ever-connected world. What do you think? Will this make us even more ‘alone together’? Let me know in the comments below!

Word count: 530

References

Cheok, A., & Zhang, E. (2019). Human–Robot Intimate Relationships (1st ed.). Cham: Springer.

Danaher, J., & McArthur, N. (2017). Robot Sex: Social and Ethical Implications (1st ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

IMDB. (2019). Her 2013. Retrieved 26 December 2019, from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/

Mortensen, D. (2017). Communication Theory (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

TED. (2018). Why We Have an Emotional Connection to Robots: Kate Darling [Video]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq6XgrYBugo&t=424s

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other (3rd ed., pp. 1–346). New York: Basic Books.

Velez, M. (2015). Current and Future Relationships Between Robots and Humans[Ebook] (1st ed.). Saint Paul: University of St. Thomas. Retrieved from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mvelezce/publications/V-SUMMA15.pdf

Over the past 2.5 decades, robots have become exponentially integrated into our lives in entertainment, business and daily functionality. The question here is, are the effects of this all good? Or should we be concerned by the rising phenomenon?

Robotic Toys

The Tamagotchi, a hand-held virtual pet, rose to international popularity after it’s release in the late 90’s. The pet relied on it’s owner to be nurtured and fed; changing in mood and dying if neglected. Numerous similar robotic toys followed this release. (Ferguson, 2019).

Turkle states that robotic pets presenting themselves as having feelings and needs activates our human nature to give robots the “consideration we give to each other” (Turkle, 2017, p. 100). Turkle expresses concern here, as she believes forming non-reciprocal attachments with emotionally incapable bots, demeans human attachment and takes us into a threatening “post-biological life” (Turkle, 2017, p. 54).

Although I can understand why Sherry appears startled, I don’t believe robotic toys are as threatening as she illustrates. Children have vast imaginations as role-play forms a significant part of their development. So long as they are used in moderation, such toys can actually be positive for a child’s development (Beeley & Bryce-Clegg, 2013).

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) is the ability of a robot or computer “to engage in human-like thought processes such as learning and reasoning” (Kok, 2009, p. 2). In 2008, Adam Cheyer co-created the first AI personal assistant, Siri; verbally activated and responsive to its user’s commands. Siri was integrated into all Apple iPhone models proceeding the 4S (Rich, 2015). Moving a step further, in 2014, Amazon released a voice-based home appliance, Echo, featuring an AI personal voice assistant named Alexa; shown in the video above. 100 million have been sold to date (Kumar, 2019).

Social robots “no longer wait for humans to project meaning on to them” as they are able to “meet our gaze, speak to us and recognise us” (Turkle, 2017, p. 2). As displayed, AI is popular and spreading fast. Like Turkle, I fear that placing robots as assistants will make us overly dependent on them. If we continue to let human intelligence take a backseat, could robots eventually become more intelligent than us?

Alongside our human rights to freedom, privacy and non-discrimination, rights section 3.9 states our right to “meaningful human contact” and “to not be measured, analysed or e-coached”. The social integration of robots already conflicts with such rights, leading me to question how good their existence can really be if they defy the laws that protect us (Est & Gerritsen, 2019, p. 17). My concerns here are reflected as 43% of UK households experience anxiety regarding the uncertainty surrounding such technology (EY, 2019).

I believe the classification of robotic integration as good or bad lies in the balance of control we are able to maintain towards it. Kranzberg similarly states, it is inherently “neutral” and that depending on how it is used, “technology can have a diverse set of social and ethical consequences” (Est & Gerritsen, 2019, p. 17). Using such technology in moderation is therefore vital if we are to maintain intelligence and our rights are to remain intact, as we move towards an increasingly technological world.

Word count: 533

References

Beeley, K., & Bryce-Clegg, A. (2013). Creative Role Play in the Early Years: How to Plan Stimulating and Exciting Role Play, Inside and Out (1st ed.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Est, R., & Gerritsen, J. (2019). Human Rights in the Robot Age: Challenges Arising from The Use of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, and Virtual and Augmented Reality. The Hague: Rathenau Instituut 2017. Retrieved from https://www.rathenau.nl/sites/default/files/2018-02/Human%20Rights%20in%20the%20Robot%20Age-Rathenau%20Instituut-2017.pdf

EY. (2019). Decoding the Digital Home 2019: Early Adopters and Digital Detoxers [Ebook] (1st ed.). EY. Retrieved from https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/ey-decoding-the-digital-home-2019/$FILE/ey-decoding-the-digital-home-2019.pdf

Ferguson, K. (2019). Pop Goes the Decade: The Nineties (1st ed.). Greenwood: ABC-CLIO LLC.

Kok, J. (2009). Artificial Intelligence (1st ed.). Oxford: Eolss Publishers.

Kumar, P. (2019). Artificial Intelligence: Reshaping Life and Business (1st ed.). Mumbai: BPB Publications.

Rich, J. (2015). iPad and iPhone Tips and Tricks (4th ed.). Indiana: Que Publishing.

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other (3rd ed., pp. 1–346). New York: Basic Books.