During last week’s symposium, Betty and Adrian began to argue about the true meaning of narcissism and if it was really applicable to online bloggers. Adrian argued that narcissists do not communicate or feel empathy, yet blogging is a means of communication, and most bloggers tend to reveal some kind of empathy even if for the most meaningless things. Betty rebuked by saying that narcissism was an accurate term to use, explaining that she felt the word wasn’t being used in the psychological context.
I would veer towards Betty’s point of view; in the social context, narcissism describes a person who is self obsessed. Blogging is a social platform, so it makes sense to appropriate the meaning of the word that correlates with its context. On a side note, as discussed in the lecture, words are complex, and we can only understand their meaning by virtue of what they aren’t. Everyone has a slightly different understanding of what each word means.
An interesting point was raised in terms of privacy. With smartphone usage proliferating at a ridiculous pace, we see more and more photos of meals, private events, and even intimate moments being shared all over the internet. Adrian argues that this is due to the fact that everyone assumes there is some kind of privacy systematically attached to whatever they post online. But this made me think, even if people naïvely believe their content is protected, what it the difference between going to a restaurant and sharing a picture of a meal, saying it tasted amazing or awful, and telling all your friends about it back in the days where internet wasn’t around? Either way you are affecting people’s opinions of a particular place, thing or idea, the only difference is that internet makes it spread faster. But word of mouth is equally powerful; the people of the French countryside during 1789 who had become possessed by the idea that the nobility were plotting to take down the revolution spread this idea all throughout France like wildfire. Isn’t this practice equally as defamatory?