Fake News as a Digital Reality

As long as humanity has existed, so have lies. People lie to each other for a variety of reasons, but that is a completely different discussion. The phenomenon of “fake news” has come into the spotlight as digital media has risen to prominence and companies such as Facebook gain enormous power and influence in modern culture. Lawmakers and regular citizens have come to realize that Facebook is a platform notorious with misleading and downright false content, often intended to influence users. After the presidential election and others following, we have to accept that we are grossly undereducated and unprepared for understanding our Internet forums and what they are truly capable of. Fake news has tremendous power in today’s digitally oriented culture, and it is often more organized than we think.

This leaves us with the burning question: what can we do to combat this? I believe the better way to ask this is, “how can we better educate people to deal with this problem?” So many people are ignorant of fake content on the Internet simply because they don’t know how to recognize it. Think of your 70 year-old grandmother. She grew up where the main source of information came from large, traditional news outlets such as the New York Times or Washington Post. These were credible sources who more or less had a monopoly on mass distributed information. Today, she logs on to her Facebook and sees an endless stream of information that has not been vetted in the same way traditional mass media has in the past. Combating fake news is a two-step approach. First, we need to educate those who are already active in the digital landscape. There seem to be less institutional ways to do this effectively, so it is critical that those who understand fake news inform others of its dangers. If a friend shares something on Facebook or another social platform that is fake news, respectfully inform them of their wrongdoing and how they can recognize false information in the future. This can be done in the comments section, in a private message or in person. If we take it upon ourselves to kindly and respectfully educate our friends who may not understand fake news, one by one we can create a more digitally competent society.

I think where the real impact can be made in fake news education is in the next generation, those who are still in school and yet to enter digital media or are still novices. This can range from the earliest stages of education through college. Implementing digital competency courses into formal education means we can ensure the next generation of digital users will not make the same mistakes many of us have. Digital competency courses can and should be taught at young ages, perhaps even as young as fourth grade. Kids are getting their hands on social media and other online forums at younger and younger ages, so it is paramount that our education system prepare them for the challenges that come with digital citizenship. An introductory course early on is valuable, but it also would do students well to take an in-depth digital competency course in college. Many colleges, Creighton included, require students to take a large core of liberal arts classes in order to graduate. With the mission of this being a well-rounded, capable student, it would benefit everyone to include into this curriculum a digital literacy course. If millions of college students are required to learn the ins and outs of digital media and content distribution, they can enter the workforce and greater society with an understanding of fake news that will help society be better informed.

Fake news is a misunderstood, minimally combatted and destructive force that has already made real impact on our society’s decisions. While damage has already been done, it’s not too late to start educating the masses on its dangers and how to combat it. While I believe the education system has the most power to make change, it falls on all of us to be aware of fake news and not be afraid to teach each other to be better digital citizens.

Photo from rawpixel (@rawpixel) on Unsplash.com. URL:

The Future of Profitable Journalism

With the digital era in full sprint, the face of journalism has never looked more different than it does today, and its future is far from guaranteed. Traditional print and cable news outlets face decreased advertising revenue, shaken public trust and competition from multi-faceted, all-digital “news” outlets. Fewer industries have been shaken by digitization more than news, and newsrooms must adapt or be destroyed. The problem at hand has been acknowledged and debated thoroughly, but no one seems to yet know how to crack the code for journalistic success in the digital age.

Nicco Mele, former publisher for the Los Angeles Times and director of Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media Politics and Public Policy, sat down for a Harvard University podcast to share his thoughts on the changing face of journalism. The biggest insight I took away was his belief that journalism, previously bloated and unchanging, now had to be rooted in small, scrappy organizations who had slimmer profit margins. Mele claims, “the future of journalism is small scrappy enterprises that are entrepreneurial, that are innovative, that are trying things.” He noted that for so long journalism was so large and profitable, that these expectations have not been adapted for the new era of news consumption. Attitudes and salaries are going to have to change, he says.

Personally, I agree with Mele and others in saying that journalism must survive by adopting new revenue streams while leaving their mission and voice unchanged. More subtle forms of advertising, such as influencer marketing and product placement, are fast outpacing traditional methods. Product placement in the form of native advertising can fit especially well to news organizations, including local ones. When done well, native advertising can be effectively integrated into journalistic content. My favorite example of this through native advertising is a piece done in the Omaha World-Herald for Creighton University. The sponsored article explained how strengthened local recruiting efforts helped build Creighton’s largest ever incoming class. Native advertising like this fits into the World-Herald‘s mission of Omaha-focused journalism. While this piece was paid content, it does still inform Omaha residents of local happenings. With careful application, native advertising can be an effective strategy that fits organically into the organization’s own content.

Further in line with the need for diverse revenues, traditional news organizations must look beyond advertising. Yes, advertising has grown more dynamic and personalized over the years, but it still is unhealthy for newsrooms to lean on it too much. There are more features than ever that help users skip or disable ads, decreasing their value and thus decreasing revenue from them. To insulate themselves from relying too heavily on an industry also in flux in the digital era, news organizations need to also build a strong foundation of paid subscribers. Subscriptions are not new to news by any means, but organizations need to better innovate the subscription system to allow for more people to subscribe in a variety of ways. Examining the Omaha World-Herald, my local Star Tribune in Minneapolis and even the Washington Post reveals their subscription models only vary between layers of print and digital access. I see this as a missed opportunity to add other formats of subscription as the New York Times does by also offering cooking and crossword subscriptions. By diversifying subscription bases, perhaps these organizations can engage more people who may not be interested in a comprehensive subscription, but may enjoy one cheaper and more focused. For example, the Star Tribune could run a politics subscription for a fraction of the regular price, giving users access to political news from across Minnesota (and beyond if the paper so pleased). With its extensive Huskers and general athletic coverage, the World-Herald could offer sports-only subscriptions. Lord knows there are enough die hard Huskers fans in the state who may be interested.

There are concerns that the urge to digitize and increase profitability in the Internet age will compromise good journalism. I get that. It is a legitimate worry that in search of a new business model, once proud news providers become slaves to click rates and web traffic. However, the alternative may just be destruction. If newspapers refuse to adapt at all, they will not exist much longer to provide the quality news they pride themselves on. These organizations must remain true to who they are and the content they provide, but everyone must adapt on some level in order to survive and keep fighting the good fight.

Photo from Elijah O’Donnell (@elijahsad) on unsplash.com. URL: https://unsplash.com/photos/t8T_yUgCKSM

‘Black Mirror’ is closer than we think

The popular Black Mirror episode, “Nose Dive,” portrays a futuristic world dominated by a social credit system of stars ratings. After virtually every interaction, citizens pull out their mobile devices and rate the other person from 1-5 stars, and are clearly able to see each others’ cumulative star ratings. These ratings determine not only their social reputation, but a host of other tangible activities, such as renting a car or purchasing an airline ticket. While this episode portrays a dystopian world and does not directly mirror our own, it is not far off from the truth.

Some aspects of “Nose Dive” already exist, just in different forms. When Lacie is trying to get the last seat on a flight to Naomi’s wedding, but the seat is reserved for those with higher ratings. This is extremely similar to current airline rewards programs, except the currency is monetary, and not social. Lacie’s visit to the coffee shop is essentially identical to what I see at Creighton’s Starbucks and other stores. Everyone is waiting to receive their drink, eyes glued to their phones. When Lacie gets her coffee and cookie, she makes sure to carefully place them and take an aesthetic picture to post to her account for others to comment and critique. I couldn’t possibly count the amount of times I have seen these exact interactions play out before me at every coffee shop I have been to. It makes me shutter to realize the effect social media and financially-based rewards systems have on our everyday society.

The overall tones of the social credit system in “Nose Dive” closely mirror our modern digital society, just with lesser repercussions (for now). On social media, we often do not share our true emotions, or only share our best. Lacie posts cute pictures of coffee, but doesn’t share her tumultuous relationship with her brother. A Creighton student might post a cute picture of her and her friends out at a party, but not comment on her struggles with depression. The same is true about social media’s judgmental power. When Lacie has a meltdown at the airport, those surrounding her give her poor ratings en masse, hurting her social reputation for one mistake. Often times social media may judge someone disproportionately for a small misstep or a simple misunderstanding. Social media has reduced our ability to both forgive and forget.

Even more disturbingly parallel to “Nose Dive” is the emergence of China’s Sesame credit scoring. Currently, it seems that it has a positive effect. Those punished include illegal airport trespassers and plastic surgery operations. For now, at least, the system seems to focus more on punishing criminal offenders and rewarding responsible citizens, but many academics and researchers see the potential for China’s authoritarian government to exploit the credit system as a way to exert more control over its 1.3 billion citizens. It is a disturbing sign of how digital media can be used as a tool of control and repression rather than expression. It goes to show how lucky we are in the United States to be able to use social media as more of an expressive platform rather than one of accountability. That being said, we have never been more under the eye of others than we are today, where everyone has a smartphone and everyone is a citizen journalist.

Photo from rawpixel (@rawpixel) on unsplash.com. URL: https://unsplash.com/photos/PBQIYpEJQB4

Flywheel: A Tale of 3 Socials

With the ever-rising status and importance of social media, content marketing is a strategy made both more accessible and more necessary for communications strategists across all kinds of industries. Local startup Flywheel is an excellent example of valuable content marketing on social media platforms. I examined their Facebook, Twitter and Instagram accounts and while there is some room for improvement, overall I find Flywheel’s content marketing to be some of the best I’ve seen.

An effective content marketer is able to post very similar content to Facebook and Twitter but effectively scale that content to better fit each platform individually, and Flywheel does this very well. There is a variety of this between posts, some being the exact same, some posts having the same message with different delivery and some content exclusive to either platform. For their anniversary, the posts had the same captions and photos, but on Twitter the account tweets articles several times a day that often don’t make it to Facebook at all. On Twitter, they announced their new search and filter feature with a GIF, but on Facebook the short video was presented differently in a format called Watch Party. This is a prime example of how Twitter is often a better platform for presenting quick videos and GIFs.

Flywheel’s Instagram is more individualized than Twitter and Facebook, which is necessary given just how different the platform is overall. However, it is not individualized enough. It essentially rehashes everything said on Twitter and Instagram, and occasionally there is a different post with a fun graphic that is not on the other two. Really, there is not much to be gained from following their Instagram account if one already follows Twitter and/or Instagram. With how hard Flywheel sells their culture, I see an opportunity to use Instagram to give more insight into the office itself without needing to redirect to other links. Instagram posts should be able to showcase the Flywheel atmosphere and culture without needing to say “check the link in our bio to find out!” This account should greater focus on just the images themselves, and not let a call to the link in bio take away from the post, as it often does on Instagram.

The biggest issue I took with all of Flywheel’s social media accounts was the over-saturation of links within their posts. On Twitter and Instagram, great content was being posted, but it was almost exclusively in the form of links to articles. Internally made articles are extremely important to content marketing, but their effect is lost when every tweet or post contains one. While these articles are not necessarily direct sells for Flywheel, they dilute the 80-20 mix of social media. On Twitter and Facebook especially, there should be more variety in posts. Even something simple as a “Happy Friday!” tweet or a picture of one of the many dogs throughout the office would help break up the endless stream of articles.

Flywheel’s social media presence and content marketing is overall very effective. They have high visibility throughout Omaha, Nebraska and beyond, and their positions and internships are among the most sought after in the area. They have laid a standard voice for their brand that is echoed perfectly across their channels, ensuring consistent content. While Flywheel has some work to do in its content marketing, mainly the proper use of the 80-20 mix, they use social media to effectively market their brand and services in unique ways.

Photo by Shridhar Gupta (@shridhar) on unsplash.com. URL- https://unsplash.com/photos/dZxQn4VEv2M

Adapting Digital Industries

In our modern “digital age,” it would seem that no industry is left unchanged by the wave of digital integration into every aspect of our lives. The behemoth fields of public relations and advertising are at the forefront of this digital innovation. The way consumers digitally communicate and interact is constantly changing, and since both disciplines are centered around communication, it is important that they be constantly following these ever-changing patterns.

Advertising faces a difficult challenge of continuing to get consumers’ attention in a digital landscape where it is easier and easier to ignore ads. With cable television going out of style and the use of ad-blockers increasing, advertisers must be more and more innovative to get their products in front of potential customers. Product placement is a great way to inject brands into popular content to create powerful associations. In class, a group found more than 10 placements in the music video for Lady Gaga’s hit song, “Telephone.” Proctor and Gamble bought an entire storyline on the hit ABC sitcom, “Black-ish.” Other unique forms of advertising have emerged as well. Native advertising allows vendors to place an article in a news site or paper while giving it the appearance of a regular article. Creighton has done this several times in the Omaha World-Herald as a way to engage the Omaha community. Other news sites like CNN will have a “From Our Sponsors” section with more native advertising articles. The form that I enjoy the most, but is the hardest to organically create, is viral video marketing. This is best illustrated with Blendtec’s Will it Blend? The YouTube program consists of hilarious videos where a silly scientists places all kinds of ridiculous things into a Blendtec blender, and has been viewed millions of times. While they are funny and enjoyable to watch, they are an extremely effective way to get Blendtec’s products in front of people.

Public relations, while less profit driven as a whole than advertising, is also responding to the new digital landscape. PR professionals have new ways of communicating with their constituents to make their message more effective and have a greater reach. The most obvious example of this is social media. During the PRSSA event Meet the Pros, I spoke with the Director of External Relations and Engagement, Jeremy Maskel. He explained that during a school lockdown, he was able to provide parents and other interested parties live information through the school’s social media accounts. While he likely used some sort of organized, after-the-fact communication as well, social media allowed him to inform people immediately as events unfolded. Under the umbrella of integrated marketing communications, public relations experts can use viral video marketing as well. WestJet’s “WestJet Christmas Miracle: Real Time Giving” video, which received over 48 million views on YouTube, served as both an advertisement and a PR effort. The message of the commercial was used to show WestJet’s charitable spirit and the energy of their employees, which isn’t in and of itself a product advertisement, but serves to give the consumer a better view of the company.

Public relations and advertising have grown more and more overlapping, and need to become more and more digital as the rest of our world and our consumers have. Both industries need to be constantly innovating in order to keep up with the lightning pace of consumer’s digital habits and needs, and it’s funny to imagine what will be the new norm in 15, 10, or even five years.

Image from rawpixel (@rawpixel) on unsplash.com URL: https://unsplash.com/photos/-xJAb5-NJSQ

Why do we see what we see?

Today, more than half of America’s adults get their news from social media. Which means for millions upon millions of people, the majority of what we see, read, share and think is determined by a few lines of code carefully hidden within Facebook or another company’s walls. Will Oremus’s insightful article into Facebook’s newsfeed algorithms challenged me to ponder the increasingly important role algorithms play in our digitally evolving world.

What struck me most was how human algorithms really are. No matter how robotic and sci-fi the whole concept of algorithms may sound, they are still ultimately determined by human beings (at least until AI becomes more prominent). In short, humans determine how machines determine what humans see, at least for now. This means that the algorithms are constantly being tweaked and improved to both account for the human errors made in producing the algorithm and the change in behaviors and preferences of Facebook’s human users.

What really intrigued and surprised me was the necessity of not just quantitative, but qualitative factors used in building newsfeed algorithms. It was interesting to see the different ways Facebook grapples with building its one billion plus newsfeeds. In their attempt to make feeds personal and more human, they have to consider likes and time spent on articles, as well as non-empirical factors such as how much and why a user liked or disliked a post. The work of Adam Mosseri, described as “the news feed’s resident philosopher,” showed me that Facebook’s algorithms somehow have to account for things that cannot be statistically quantified. Facebook also faces the challenge of competition from other digital platforms like Twitter and Snapchat, who disseminate information in very different ways. The article mentioned that while Facebook’s algorithms have grown more precise in optimizing the user experience, people are enjoying Facebook less than the early days when crude algorithms or just human intuition were determining the content uses interacted with.

I am noticing Facebook’s struggles first-hand all around me. Less and less of my peers are using Facebook, preferring platforms such as Twitter and Facebook-owned Instagram. While I cannot exactly explain why, Facebook’s audience is increasingly made of older adults, while more and more young adults and teenagers are leaving their accounts inactive, and new entries into social media are less likely to join Facebook than ever. Meanwhile, it seems every other week Mark Zuckerberg is testifying to Congress that Facebook compromised the information of a concerning number of users. While this article gave me a better look at how humans are trying to make Facebook better, I still have yet to be convinced that it is a platform I should spend more of my time on. I find other networks, especially Twitter, more enjoyable and relevant, and Facebook has yet to earn back much of my time.

Photo by Jacob Miller (@kineticbear) on unsplash.com. URL: https://unsplash.com/photos/ot5kWZkH97s

The Online Generation

People my age and more so children a few years younger than me have grown up in the digital world, where most of the modern technology that is so influential in today’s world (smartphones, tablets, etc) already existed. David Rushkoff and Generation Like take us through the new ways we interact with our world, and the effect it has on young and old, focusing on the younger generations whose lives are the most online. What resonated with me most is how our youth share and interact in a world that is increasingly digitized, yet there is little being done to monitor and educate them about what this actually means.

Children and young adults are spending more and more time and putting more and more personal information online without stepping back to reflect on their actions, because how should a 13-year-old be able to self-discern proper sharing on the Internet? The older generations created “Generation Like” by creating the vast Internet and giving it to all with no guidelines or restrictions. 8th grader Daniela Diaz is a great example of this in the video. She posts singing videos, vlogs and pictures to the web to enjoy the attention they receive. While nothing is wrong with posting a few videos to YouTube, it seems Daniela does not necessarily understand the gravity of what she is doing. And how could she? 8th graders are not expected to have a great amount of self-acquired digital literacy. The most troubling fact about this video is not that her parents are unaware of her online presence, rather it’s that they support and encourage it. Her mother boasts that she takes all of Daniela’s photos and was the one to originally suggest that she post videos to YouTube. Her mother’s behavior is a disturbing reflection of a greater reality: Parents don’t understand the consequences of a digital world, so how are their kids supposed to know? Daniela’s mother explains that when her daughter posts a picture in a swimsuit or bikini, she gets more likes than other pictures. Mind you, at the time of Generation Like, she is not old enough to drive a car. She literally has data that her young daughter exposing herself receives more attention, yet she does not seem concerned by it. Understandably so, the gravity of Daniela’s actions on the Internet is lost on her, as she gets caught up in the fun of likes and comments from “fans.” Parents and all adults need to better understand the permanence of the Internet and its other attributes in order to properly educate their children who nowadays are surrounded by technology from the day they are born. Daniela’s mother doesn’t have to ban her daughter from posting, but before she begins, she should explain to her the Internet’s permanence and other potential consequences. Following the release of the episode, Daniela’s YouTube channel saw a surge of hateful comments.

Another aspect of the Internet discussed in Generation Like and especially affecting children is social currency moving online. Now, young adults’ popularity is often determined by how many likes they get, or the perception of their online profiles. Rushkoff sits down at a table of teenagers helping their friend revamp his Facebook profile and interviews a girl who works to be the most recognized Hunger Games fan online. Rushkoff shows how much time teens put into their Internet presence and content usually without pay, but as an expert tells him, “it doesn’t matter, because they’re famous.” It interests me how much time we spend online not for a tangible reward, but for social acceptance and prestige.

Generation Like examines everyday online happenings for our kids while going deeper to learn more about how today’s youth spend their time online. This video unsettled me, realizing just how much unrestricted and uneducated access young adults have to the Internet while really knowing nothing about it. Our schools need more web competency courses, and our parents need to educate themselves much more before ever putting a device in their child’s hands.

Photo by Tim Gouw (@punttim) on Unsplash.com. URL: https://unsplash.com/photos/LmYcS4nwj8w

e-Friendship

Technology moves fast, and that often means that we as a society are quick to jump into the latest and greatest digital advancement without much thought for its potential repercussions and consequences. The biggest way technology has changed society is in how we interact and build relationships. We are left to consider, what happens when a relationship goes digital? In short, my philosophy is that digital connection is best when used to enhance a relationship with strong in-person chemistry and time put in, but can be problematic when online interaction is relied on too much for a relationship’s strength.

In my personal experience, technology can bring so much good to relationships at all levels. I can call my parents and family back home when I do not get to see them in person for months. I will text a friend to see what they are up to and if they want to come over or go do something. Or conversely, if I have had a bad day, a friend is never too far away. Whether I need to hear the voice of someone far away or see someone down the street, technology can help me accomplish those things. That being said, online relationships themselves are not deepening for me if they do not work to enhance my in-person communication. If I solely talk to someone over Snapchat or text, that relationship can only go so far. In high school and perhaps earlier in college I was more interested in just keeping in contact with a great volume of people, but now that I am older, I look for relationships with depth. I try to spend less time talking to people online and focusing my online communications to result in face-to-face interaction.

In Program or be Programmed, David Rushkoff explains that communication is only 7% verbal, while the other 93% comes from nonverbal cues. This means when someone texts me “I’ve had a bad day today lol,” what does that mean?? Are they being sarcastic? Is “lol” trying to not be serious while being serious? If someone tells me that in person, I can read their face and other factors to better understand what they are saying. What Rushkoff does not elaborate on is through digital communication we also lose context. In high school, I was far more anxious in my online communications. I was not mature or knowledgable enough to consider outside factors that contribute to how someone texts me or how long it takes, etc. I used to take it much more personally when I did not hear back from someone in a while or at all. Now that I am older, I have a better understanding of these contexts as well as who my good friends are. When I don’t hear back, I think, well I know they have a big test this week, or I didn’t really text them anything important, so I don’t really need to hear back soon. If a good friend doesn’t respond, I know better than to think they mean it personally or they do not like me. I didn’t always know that.

As citizens in the world and on the web, it is important for us to consider how digital we want our relationships, and that can vary from friendship to friendship. Some of my closest friends I only really communicate with when I see in person and some I stay in regular online contact with, but it is important to have somewhat of an overarching philosophy when it comes to digital friendships. Personally, I have made it my goal to shift my emphasis further and further from digital to real when it comes to my friends. Sitting on my phone messaging a friend will never replace or usurp spending real, quality, face-to-face time.

Photo from Juri Gianfrancesco (@jurigianfra) on unsplash.com. Link

A Day Without Technology

When planning time for four hours without technology, I thought I had a plan. I would wake up on Saturday morning, and start my time from about 8:30 onward. Saturday rolls around, I fall back asleep for two of my four hours. Sighs. Ok, I guess we’re trying this again tomorrow. I had no idea the extent of what I would learn that day. My four hours without technology Sunday morning started out great. I cleaned my room and finished my book I had been too busy to make time for as of late. I was really enjoying the feeling of not being consumed by screen time as soon as I woke up. It not only meant that I was using different methods of entertainment. I also got to take a break from email, homework and the myriad of useless notifications that fill my phone every day. Two hours in, I was enjoying this break from my over-connected world, and since have been mulling the idea of trying to have unplug time every weekend.

The first half of my screen-free session went along the lines of what I was expecting. I was enjoying my free time, and prepared to go run errands to finish out my time. I offered to drive because my roommate had driven me around yesterday, and left my phone at home. On the way to shop, I was rear ended waiting at a stoplight on 72nd Street. A young lady had rear-ended another woman who was then pushed into me. She got out of her car and said “I’m so sorry, I had GPS on my phone and looked down to see where to go,” (although, she was wearing a College of Saint Mary t-shirt, from which we were less than a mile away, so I think she was just embarrassed to say she was texting). I had to borrow my roommate’s phone to take pictures of my car and call my dad. I wrote down the names and numbers of the two other women involved on a piece of paper. After a frustrating ordeal that lasted almost two hours, we were finally on our way. My four hours without tech became much longer.

My experience without digital media came in two phases, and each brought different lessons. During my morning at home, I was reminded that taking a break from technology is very freeing. It felt good to “detox” and sit down with a book, chat with my roommate and just enjoy the morning without the constant distraction of my phone. So often in my day-to-day, I find myself wasting so much time by just getting sucked into it. It starts with responding to a text and devolves into squandered minutes scrolling around. I found that leaving my phone charging on my bedside table where it spends the night meant I was far more intentional in whatever I was doing. When I was reading my book, I just sat down and read without glancing at my phone every time it buzzed. Same with talking to my roommate. Often on weekend mornings, he plays video games and I sit and talk to him. This morning, he paused his game and we just sat and chatted for 20 or more minutes. It also allowed me to be productive and focus on things I had to do that didn’t involve a screen, such as doing the dishes and cleaning my room, which often go by the wayside when I would rather watch Netflix or do homework on my laptop. Later in the afternoon during my automotive misadventures, I received a whole different set of lessons. Throughout the process following the accident, I wished I had my phone so I could take pictures of the damage, call my parents and save the contact information for the other parties involved. Luckily my roommate was with me. It was a very real example of how technology can be extremely useful in a variety of unexpected situations. Simply having a cell phone on-hand provides a lot of guarantees against disaster. On the other hand, distracted driving with a phone is what caused the whole mess. We really do need to be mindful for when technology blurs our vision, rather than enhances it as it is supposed to.

It is safe to say my experience without digital technology was an interesting one. In my more typical morning, I already learned quite a lot about the benefits of stepping away from technology. When things got weird, I found myself in a strange situation that taught me more than I ever would have guessed. In the modern digital age, it only is growing more important for each of us to individually reckon with our technology consumption and the role it plays in our lives.

Photo by Randy Fath (@randyfath) on unsplash.com. Link: https://unsplash.com/photos/DGrQZWLw8lk

Everything is Permanent

In today’s world of digital interactions, there still somehow exists the illusion to some people that “deleting” something on the Internet actually deletes it. Alfred Hermida explains in “Tell Everyone” how social media and digital technology do not necessarily change the nature of our interactions, just the medium, and that these interactions are now made permanent record. We are able to exchange information and ideas to more people than we every have been able to, but the caveat is that every interaction online is meticulously archived and recorded. A person could tweet something controversial, then push the delete button a few minutes later thinking they are in the clear. In reality, that tweet exists in some form on the Internet for the rest of eternity. A more accurate name for “delete” would be “remove from timeline.” The #1 rule we teach our children for the Internet should be “just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean it’s not there.”

The Internet’s nature of permanence both gives and takes. As users, we must be extremely intentional about every form of content we place on the Internet. Every time I tweet, send an email or post on Facebook, I need to think of the repercussions. Is this content appropriate? Is it something I don’t mind others, including strangers, seeing? In 20 years will I look back and be embarrassed by this? There have been plenty of times where as a prank, friends have found my tweets from my early years on Twitter (I confess doing the same to them). There was nothing inappropriate, but definitely material that made me cringe for its awkwardness. Even though I could delete that tweet so they could not see it, that means digging through hundreds or thousands of tweets to find it. It does not take an experienced hacker to dig through and retrieve our “deleted” Internet content. More often than not, it is simply lying on our feeds, buried under years of newer posts. Take Milwaukee Brewers relief pitcher Josh Hader, whose homophobic and racist tweets from when he was 17 resurfaced on Twitter during the MLB All Star Game.

The permanence of any and all Internet interactions is not completely negative. It encourages us to put our best foot forward, and has a way of punishing the foolish or bigoted. Reading about Josh Hader’s Twitter incident, I in no way felt bad for him. While I know every 17-year-old is far from smart, he tweeted things like “KKK” and “I hate gay people.” At that age, individuals should know better than to put such brash language into circulation, permanent or not, on the Internet or in spoken word. Another way Internet permanence benefits us is by holding public figures accountable. Whenever a politician tweets, their views are on the record for the public to see. In a debate, a senator could say, “I believe in abortion rights,” and the moderator could respond, “but just nine months ago you tweeted that you were firmly pro-life.” The same goes for celebrities. When individuals monetize their fame and public persona on the Internet, the consumer has the ability and responsibility to use digital channels to see if they approve of that person’s conduct before partaking in their product. Take for example James Gunn, director of the extremely popular Guardians of the Galaxy movie franchise. Recently, he was slated to begin shooting Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, when some of his old tweets surfaced from 2008 and 2009 joking about rape and pedophilia and Disney cut ties with him. While there is debate over this particular incident, it is a perfect illustration of when Internet permanence holds public figures accountable to their words, no matter the time. On one hand, as consumers of social media, we must be careful with our words and understand their impact and permanence. In return, we are able to see people’s thoughts going back as long as their Internet history, and can make judgements on public figures and peers with information we may not have had before the digital age.