MetaChat - social media attention is addictive

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

13 April 2013

social media attention is addictive I can't really blame these attention seeking teen girls on instagram man. Those thumbs-ups, those new comments in response to your writings, those retweets of your responses by others, that stuff really does make your brain go "that was nice". I've mostly stopped posting on or reading forums and other online outlets these days but whenever I do it I'm reminded of why the mechanisms have such strong pull.

post by: Firas at: 14:46 | 35 comments

I will not read this nor respond to it so you are out of luck.

posted by arse_hat 13 April | 14:52

dammit!

posted by Firas 13 April | 14:53

≡ Click to see image ≡

posted by Doohickie 13 April | 15:53

Oh, man, those attention seeking women. Being all social and bubbly and engaging and all. They think they're so cute. I hate them.

posted by jouke 13 April | 16:02

yes jouke, clearly I'm referring to people being social and bubbly. that would make a whole lot of sense.

posted by Firas 13 April | 16:10

Affirmation really is nice and when you frame their attention-seeking in that light it is understandable, and I hadn't thought of it that way. Huh.

posted by mightshould 13 April | 18:35

yeah you'd think pleasant interactions in real life would give you more of a dopamine rush but sometimes that removed, virtual, atomized interaction with someone halfway across the world discussing what you were just doing can be more of a direct 'hit'. it's it's very weird. and for people who're designing these systems it raises questions that are almost ethical: is it fair to make people want to keep coming back to see their latest likes and notifications, stuff like that.

posted by Firas 13 April | 19:11

really what makes forums so interesting is just how 'niche' you can go on them. The other day I left a comment in one of the NYTimes blogs and they tweeted it(!) and I thought that was fun.

But the thing is, like on that random time at that random day, nobody around me cared to suddenly talk about what I wrote a paragraph about at the NYT, right? It was keyed off of the article. Me, the article writer, the article reader, the social media person at the NYT were all in that virtual headspace discussing that topic. (It's a generalist topic but right there, right then, it wasn't something a dozen people around us were talking about, unlike on that page where hundreds of people are reading that same thing and a couple are responding to it etc)

These are two pretty disparate issues (likes and notifications on social media streams vs forums and comments on blogs) but they just tie together in that "Get Back To Me" mode. You did something. Someone said something back. We touched base. It's so discrete and transactional compared to the more diffuse way this happens in physical, face-to-face life. It's almost pavlovian.

posted by Firas 13 April | 19:19

Thank god teen guys never seek attention on Instagram.

posted by halonine 13 April | 21:43

you guys are totally right. let me clarify that I can't blame the [girls/guys/kangaroos] of [pre-birth/childhood/teen/adulthood age] for putting random closeups of their nipples on instagram

posted by Firas 13 April | 22:10

everybody needs to feel like they mean something to somebody, somewhere.

posted by Miko 13 April | 22:16

Being young sucks so much, you have so little control and so much being forced to do shit and you don't really know what you're doing and the future is scary and you don't know who you are, affirmation and praise from people that you're doing okay and you're an okay person. It's hard for me to blame someone for wanting more, or needing more, or getting addicted or whatever.

posted by fleacircus 13 April | 22:19

Several insightful comments on this ironically narcissistic post.

posted by BoringPostcards 13 April | 22:42

"everybody needs to feel like they mean something to somebody, somewhere." Sadly this can lead to punching folks in the nose and arson.

posted by arse_hat 13 April | 22:49

BP, If you read my post instead of approaching it with dull-mind reactionism you'd see my point is that the patterns in question are shared across everyone.

posted by Firas 13 April | 22:53

Sure, okay.

I only ever want specific likes and when I get them, I know I hit my half court shot. I'd much rather get two very specific "likes" rather than 29 crowd pleasing generic soundbits that people want to hear.

I've only ever made two half court shots, didn't expect to, on a single zen try, and just walked away.
Because that's how it's done.

posted by ethylene 14 April | 04:54

...random closeups of their nipples on instagram

Well, at least now we know what you were doing on Instagram.

(BoPo: It's never easy pointing out narcissism to a narcissist.)

posted by Pips 14 April | 16:57

For real, Pips? Are we going to act like I'm the first person to point out that social media can be addictive and young people may be posting things that are inadvisable? Google the two issues and you'll find millions of articles about it

posted by Firas 14 April | 17:25

Okay I wasn't going to go there but let's get into it. What are you guys mad about in my post? Literally every statement I've made is 100% resolutely obvious and defensible. Explain what's "narcissistic" about what I've said.

posted by Firas 14 April | 17:28

Read these if you're blissfully unaware of people's behaviors in networked publics:

The Imagined Audience Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Facebook: The encyclopedia of beauty?

Teens and Tiaras: Virtual Beauty Contests on Instagram, and Why the Company Should Do Something About Them

I'm not on instagram personally but I've seen some things from there that are far beyond being "bubbly." That's making bad decisions about what to post. Let me know if you need more examples.

And read these about the main gist of my post:

Dopamine Makes You Addicted To Seeking Information: "According to researcher Kent Berridge, these two systems, the "wanting" (dopamine) and the "liking" (opioid) are complementary. "

^^ And I could come up with hundreds of more papers, research, direct quotes of self reported behavior, examples if you want. I have seen people act INSANE on facebook and I'm sure we can all dig up more examples from all over the internet of people writing stuff online that they wouldn't if it weren't being read by anyone.

Then get back to me if you have a serious point and we can get into it.

posted by Firas 14 April | 18:10

Okay, Firas, I'll do that.

By the by, I believe the aforementioned light-hearted references to irony and narcissism were in response to your own self-promotion (i.e., the NYT's thing, which is cool, actually -- you might have just posted about that) while seemingly demeaning others, teenage girls or otherwise, for seeking online attention.

No worries. We still love you. ; )

posted by Pips 14 April | 21:17

Wow, I'm sorry for illustrating my point from my own experiences. I don't want your "love", I want a response that's less vapid if you're going to back up any of the pointless emotional sarcasm I've been getting in here to a solid, evidence-based, non-controversial set of points.

posted by Firas 14 April | 21:28

When Pips, possibly the sweetest woman alive, lays the down the truth, that means it's time to take a step back and re-evaluate, son.

posted by Eideteker 14 April | 22:15

Like I said, don't type this content-free nonsense at me if you want me to "evaluate" anything.

posted by Firas 14 April | 22:20

You guys can literally not win this argument. Every single point of mine is glaringly obviously to the most transient observer and backed up by an unending pit of cross referenced research. I swear to god I will take it there if you have the stomach to put the intellectual courage to put the conviction of a single cognitive thread to your your superficial whiplash.

posted by Firas 14 April | 22:26

actually, forget it. I have stuff to do.

posted by Firas 14 April | 22:30

Sadly this can lead to punching folks in the nose and arson.

So true!

Every single point of mine is glaringly obviously to the most transient observer and backed up by an unending pit of cross referenced research

It's true; I think that's why it could have stood on its own feet without the personal addition.

Give us a little credit, we all read major media, pop-psych and "think pieces" too.

posted by Miko 14 April | 22:37

what's my personal addition? what's my personal addition? go ahead, Miko, tell me something they're not telling me.

posted by Firas 14 April | 22:39

Firas, you said that people using online social media networks are "attention-seeking" and implied that you were above that, as you've "mostly stopped" posting or reading.

You then plugged yourself as making a comment on a social-media-equipped site that got retweeted and you were excited about it.

All of which would have been fine, I think (and I actually very much like it when people celebrate their own successes and accomplishments), if you hadn't started with a misogynist comment in your original post implying that (a) only "teen girls" really use social media and (b) the only people "seeking attention" on social media are teen girls.

You basically threw young women under the bus for no reason, while denigrating an activity (posting to social media) that you participate in. And that we all participate in, really, given that's more or less what MeCha is.

I don't think anyone disagrees with any of your facts, just your presentation of them.

And seriously, it's awesome that you got retweeted by the NYT.

posted by occhiblu 14 April | 23:23

I think you may still be missing something here, Firas. Or perhaps I misunderstood. But frankly, I don't see any argument to "win" here. In any case, you seem very determined to be angry. If I didn't know better, I might think you were trolling.

(Thanks anyway, Eid... I don't know if I always live up to such kind words, but I do appreciate it.)

On preview: What occhi said.

posted by Pips 14 April | 23:26

an accomplishment! how the fuck is commenting on a website an accomplishment!! jesus christ.

I'm sorry occhi I just ate some cottage cheese that had more robustness than this reasoning. Did say I was "above it"? NO. Did I say only teen girls seek attention on social media? NO. So we've gotten to the bottom of this, that nobody has a real concern with anything I've said, just with a couple in-passing examples I described in a couple posts consisting of a few dozen words. God help some of these people if they hear a pop song or read a novel that picks one example out of a dozen to describe a phenomenon.

Hell.

posted by Firas 14 April | 23:35

You did not say only teen girls seek attention on social media.

But you did only say that teen girls seek attention on social media. Like occhiblu said.

posted by halonine 15 April | 00:21

halonine, that is a purposefully obtuse reading of my post. I was very disappointed that you'd pull that after we've had mostly pleasant interactions in the past. And jouke, you too.

posted by Firas 15 April | 00:31

I was explaining what many of us are trying to get at here. It might seem to be a fine distinction, but it's an important one. When you write, you must remember that readers can't read your mind. Perhaps it is an obtuse reading. As you can see, it's a prevalent one here. Always remember your audience.

posted by halonine 15 April | 01:12

Hey Firas, I can tell you're angry. But it's really not necessary I promise. We all mean well here.
My suggestion: let's all just let this misunderstanding go and move on.
Best wishes from NL

posted by jouke 15 April | 11:34

← Free ebooks. || Some sad/some happy/some help name this new dog. →

HOME || REGISTER || LOGIN