When I was in the sixth grade, a girl named Caitlin came running across the soccer field. She told us how her radio said we were at war, how the United States were already in a battle; and that a building in New York was gone. Caitlin was describing her understanding of 9/11.
Fourteen years later, in present society, everyone beyond the age of a preteen would simultaneously have had notifications sent to their wireless devices within a few minutes of whatever global event had occured. What we choose to do with that information is likely played out on the same medium of which it was received for many—the Internet.
In a week mired in tragedy and devastation around the globe, journalists, politicians, and everyday folk sounded off to support others, condemn actions, relay opinions, and debate all things remotely related online. What started for many as an alarm with attacks in Paris, grew to a bigger picture that began to include Beirut, Kenya, Baghdad and Mizzou (the University of Missouri).
Within 12 hours of the attacks in Paris, Facebook introduced a feature where you could instantly change your profile picture foreground to include a translucent flag of France. With this change, came a series of questions that often arise after large and impactful global events occur.
When the profile photo feature was introduced, it was apparent that it had an effect on the media and on various social media accounts.
As a result, rational discussions regarding media exposure and social media effectiveness often get lost. For some social media users, what may have begun as an honest and sentimental post expressing empathy, gets turned into a wide sprawl of accusations that push personal political agendas. The negativity and vitriol that stems from discussions on social media can be, at times, unreal and infuriating.
“Y’know, if it weren’t for social media, we would never know that some of our friends are actually terrible people,” said one disenchanted Facebook user. Perhaps this user is right—but what is not included in that sentiment is the true wave of empathy that is felt by the public, even if those sentiments are not immediately present in social media posts. There is no guide or universal etiquette to tell others how to perform in every way on the Internet. Perhaps even in this column, I’m grandstanding on an important issue and using it to show and question the chaos that unravels on social media.
Recently, social media has brought ways to receive notifications that your friends and family are safe in a time of crisis. I, too, have friends in Paris and, like many, received a Facebook check-in update saying they were safe. These social media notifications are how I discovered the attacks were underway. However, by keeping us notified and up to date, social media has created a perceived similarity between taking action and posting something. If changing your Facebook picture, arguing on Twitter, debating with friends and people who you thought were your friends isn’t doing anything to change the world, what will? In the midst of the constant presence of social media, it has become clear that folks on the internet are fast to criticize a lack of action regardless of good intentions.
Since The Ontarion undertakes the publishing of student work, the opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of The Ontarion. The Ontarion reserves the right to edit or refuse all material deemed sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise unfit for publication as determined by the Editor-in-chief.