Cancel Culture and the rise of Tik Tok

 


“Social media platforms have become powerful battlegrounds where various individuals, organizations, and even governments engage in the battle for public opinion. Considering the rapid dissemination of information and the ability for anyone to voice their perspectives, how has this online landscape transformed the dynamics of public opinion formation and communication strategies?”

With the explosion of social media, we are now able to voice our opinions about anything, almost instantly. We are creating a digital memory of every thought we have, every issue, every inconvenience we want to talk about. I never really understood the human urge to spill everything online, to push and cry and be the loudest in the room — in a situation where that is almost impossible to do so (ignore the blatant cognitive dissidence). This has transformed the online landscape into a frenzy of opinion-dumping, cancel culture when you say the wrong thing, and the usage of social media by companies and government officials to connect with younger users. Cancel culture became a major issue due to public shaming of individuals, sometimes for the better, but overall leading to more waves of hatred and irrelevant usage of media outlets. I want to read about climate change, not about celebrity love triangles. I also find it extremely humorous when politicians get on Tik Tok and humiliate themselves trying to be “cool” to attract an audience. I don’t have an account, but the reposting of reels on other platforms aids to it. Also, I think the story of Gypsy Rose is the perfect example to summarize the initial question posed above. I’ll spare you the drama in this post. It’s a great YouTube video if you are bored though. 

Check out this article as well for additional information (on the topic, not Gypsy Rose) https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/05/19/americans-and-cancel-culture-where-some-see-calls-for-accountability-others-see-censorship-punishment/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Digital Natives vs Digital Immigrants

 This week we will be looking at two articles and answering questions about them.  According to Prensky, what is the immigrant/native divide, and how has it affected how students learn? The first article by Marc Prensky,  https://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf  — talks about what exactly digital natives and digital immigrants are. There terms were coined to differentiate learning styles and attention spans of young generations that grew up with the digital world vs older generations who grew up pre-internet.   Younger generations are having learning differences because their minds work in a different way compared to how material is being taught. There is also a divide caused by knowledge to use online resources or not.  Here is the second article  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0742051X16306692  by Paul Kirschner.  Kirschner some of the myths associat...
Read more

Social semiotics

Image
       Social semiotics is a social theory that displays how something can be communicated in different modes, by using text and imagery to convey information. Michael Halliday and Gunther Kress developed tools for the analysis of the interrelation of power and language by providing their account of language as a social phenomenon (Gualberto & Kress, 2018). It is important because it describes how we see the world, the assumptions we make, and how we choose to communicate.      Understanding vertical and horizontal positioning is key in understanding the rules of social semiotics. When an image is positioned vertically, it is interpreted as saying that the top of the image represents ideals, aspirations, and what is imagined. The bottom, in contrast, represents what is known, reality and facts. In horizontal positioning, the left of the imagine shows known, given information while the right displays new facts and findings. The methodology also incl...
Read more

The Toulmin Argument

Image
  The Toulmin Argument is an argumentation style that breaks it down into different components: claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing.  The claim is the main argument, something you are trying to prove to your audience. The grounds are evidence to help support your claim, while the warrant is an assumption that links the two. The qualifier is something you may add to give it some leeway since the claim may not always be correct. Backing provides extra support to the warrant, such as using specific examples, and the rebuttal essentially validates a different point of view.  These can successfully be applied to online arguments or discussions to show a reasonable exchange of information and facilitate productive discourse. Many online arguments are fueled by emotions, especially around the current political state of our world. The Toulmin argument offers a better way of communication. For example, instead of just saying “Trump is awful” or “Israel sucks”...
Read more