Monday, 8 February 2016

Things I Researched: Social Media and Psychology


'My job is not to be easy on people. My job is to make them better,' said Apple founder Steve Jobs at point in time to somebody who was definitely not me. Presumably this pithy point about the purpose of his metier didn’t account for the recent phone security quandary Apple have been having but it's still a great quote to sum up what their philosophy s'all aboout . Unfortunately my job as Social Media Guy is neither as influential not as well paid as Monsieur Jobs’ vocation but it has provided me with a decent opportunity to research into Cyberpsychology, which I did all afternoon.

Here's five things I learnt:

1) Selfies can be explained by our need to control how others perceive us.

The reason people share selfies relates to an unconscious desire to understand ourselves, and also to change how people perceive how we look. We take selfies to alter the way we look to others, usually getting the best angle possible to achieve a look that we consider our best. It's an attempt to define who we are and how we would like to be seen to the outside world. This looking-glass self then allows us to observe the results in the form of comments, likes and/or re-tweets

2) Around 30-40% of our everyday conversations are dedicated to talking about ourselves...

...but when we initiate conversation online this jumps to around 80%. The main reason is because we don’t need to factor in ‘intimate’ social cues like facial and vocal recognition. There's less need to 'read' others and (unless you're me) people will naturally act less self-consciously during conversation. We also talk much more about subjects we care about. Of course the best writers have known this for centuries, which is why they're also the best egotists.

3) 85% of people say that reading other people’s responses helps them understand the world. 

Our engagement in virtual communities such as social media sites, forums and comment sections creates a ‘shared reality’ that we use to understand things. This is based on our personal experiences but we also pay close attention to what others also say about theirs'. This helps explain the appeal of social media sites and shows how our experience of reality is never defined simply by ourselves but is built through collective knowledge.

4) Faces have a remarkable way of drawing our attention.

Pictures with faces naturally stand out. These images compel us not just to look at them, but also to observe the direction that the face is looking, as well as the expression. This is partly explained because we associate faces with trust and pleasure; established during infancy when we as babies we recognise our mother (or mother-figure) by the sight of her/his face.

5) How much we value a product (or service) is proportional to the number users engaging with it.

We're all liable to peer pressure and that's okay. A relatively new company can build a bigger user-base by attracting key figures who in turn use their influence to attract others by expressing positive views about the service. The more users involved; the more trust we put into the product. This is known as Metcalfe’s Law and explains why everybody and their dog uses Facebook.

Sunday, 7 February 2016

Things I Satired: Professional Film Critic breaks record for adjective use


I was bored at work today so I decided to write this. I also started the whole blog. Go me!

Film critic, Elizabeth Handel, has today released a review for an upcoming movie that has broken the record for the amount of adjectives used to describe a single thing ever.

Writing for Wessex Weekly, Elizabeth's 200-word analysis of the recent Chuck McTino superhero blockbuster Grasshopper Man was written with such intense description that readers are reported to have found it impossible not to stop what they're doing to watch the movie straightaway.

Describing her style as like, "packing all the descriptive words I could think of into one small piece of text", Elizabeth's slick and insightful review is a profoundly bold and brutal elaboration of one man's slow descent into the savage, uncompromising, and foreboding wilderness of time and space.

Wessex Weekly subscriber Bernard Pickering told Third Eye that he found Elizabeth's review a little on-the-nose, but that it worked for him because it "offered an extraordinary level of depth which ensured it successfully explored the twisted and hellish ego of the destructive and vicious lead character, Brian".

Bernard went on to say that, the review is "indicative of Elizabeth's expertise," and that it, "probes the mind and purges the soul, letting into our hearts the ghostly images of those who bask in allowing the fateful doom of communities to come to fruition when their ascent to power is maintained by the maniacal and ferocious inner tendencies of man".

Wessex Weekly editor, Harriet Wateridge, told us that she didn't really understand anything about the film from Elizabeth's review but that she published because "we had a deadline and she was the only person who saw it".

While Grasshopper Man was overlooked for the Best Picture award at last week's Academy Awards, Elizabeth hopes that her award provides solace for McTino. She's quoted as saying, "I dedicate my remarkable and superlative review to Chuck, especially in these desolate times when sorrow reigns and blackest night cascades the sky meaning our corporeal entities require a bit of cheeriness now and then".