Introduction
The goal of social networks is the formal representation of the structure of personal relationships beyond the dyad (Webb, & Wright 2011). Social media like, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are all part of the innovative methods of communicating with a distant person using modern electronic development, each with its approach that is favored by a social group as well as, a distinctive set of policies. The world has never been more reciprocally connected. However, this form of communication or interaction, while superb, does not have its disadvantage.
This paper will analyze the role of social media’s influence (Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube) in activism and revolution on the world stage.
Isolation
The Internet is the telecommunication system that transmits images of objects of the 21st century, an electronic magnet that often pulls us aside from the physical world. There have been various research about the dangers of Internet addiction and the activism and revolution on the world stage.
Like any abnormally strong craving, the real cost, for the hooked, is the importance and value of physical relationships with others. An individual may get pleasure from online affairs using social media sites like MySpace, Face book or Twitter, for instance, but the distinction between these methods of interactions and physical interactions with people in the world is visibly immeasurable (Webb, & Wright 2011). Given that, we expect little from online socialization than they can offer no satisfactory explanation is presented why the influence of social media sites to join the world efficiently to other people without physical contact cant be enjoyed.
The difficulty, on the other hand, is the smart way of exchanging electronic relationships for physical contact.
The world believes they are effectively communicating with others through the Internet, but too many electronic means of interaction inconsistently causes isolation of physical contact.
Dangers
Communicating by electronic means is challenging. The mode of expression through Internet communication is by words like “Buzz”, but with physical interaction, emotional and inspirational words and expression that has real power to lift the spirit are felt.
Though some people feel uneasy with personal interaction, so it is quite understandable why they choose the Internet means of communication. Specifically, because electronic means convey emotion so weakly compared to physical interaction.
Physical interactions, though more complicated, are more probable to result in encouraging effects and present chances for personal development and interactions. Though society finds themselves lured to communicate through the Internet since it is faster and easier—the effect is frequently worse than and frustrating (Parks 2007).
Etiquette
For sending and receiving rapid information and business transaction efficiently, the Internet is exceptional. On the other hand, for expressing emotionally responsive or pleasing connections, it is not. Communicating through the internet is used when seated back-to-back in the office, or fast distance. It is used to keep records of the schedule. Nevertheless, when serious and emotional messages are to be passed, the physical mode of interaction is the most excellent (Parks 2007).
Even when users of social media are all cautious to use the Internet only to transmit information, there is still a considerable risk. Most people communicated, tend to delay in replying to emails when they do not have what they deem to be a concrete reply or evade the required task stated in the mail. On contrary, it is like being asked a question, and before answering they turn and move away without answering. It is quite easy to disregard an email sender’s demand than a call from someone made physically because an email sender expects to get a reply or is irritated for not receiving a response. This behavior is against the etiquette of human interaction.
The world’s “emotional invisibleness” on the Internet perchance also gives much detail of the abusive or venomous language used to express blame, fault, and bitter deep-seated ill will observed on so many websites. People communicate freely through the Internet than through physical interaction since the person being addressed is not present to convey their emotional response. It is as if part of the human sensory and control apparatus consisting of a network of nerve cells that records the emotions of others has been inactivated or removed when communicating electronically.
Conclusion
The Internet and other social networking sites are extraordinary means of communication. Nevertheless, even as it decreases the physical contact with others worldwide, and linked people together, it existed to push the world populace further distant. Like any helpful device, to make technology advantageous requires the use of excellent judgment (Baron 2010). No matter what, the limits that prevent the world populace from impulsively uttering out in unrestricted statements seem far stress-free when the means of interaction is typing. Regrettably, typed messages frequently hurt seriously, while electronic messages of self-reproach paradoxically have small power to mend. Possibly Internet users do not imagine such messages have the same influence on harm as when said physically.
Works Cited
Baron, Naomi. Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2010, Print.
Parks, Malcolm Ross. Personal Relationships And Personal Networks. New Jersey, NJ: Routledge, 2007, Print.
Webb, Lynne, and Wright Kevin. Computer-Mediated Communication in Personal Relationships. New York, NY: Peter Lang, 2011, Print.