Any critiques of social media? I'm looking for something

File: 1353088148Turkle-Alone_Together_pb.jpg (570KB, 299x448px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 299x448px

>>7580485

>>7580485

I don't know but if you haven't read Society of the Spectacle because something is turning you off about it I would recommend just reading it. As I read it I found that almost everything in it applied to social media and why people do what they do on facebook etc. Even if someone wrote a recent book about that subject and the internet I kind of doubt it would be as good as SotS.

>>7580511
This, same goes for Simulacra & Simulation

>>7580552
So I've read somewhere that Baudrillard's works are just hot air?

The novel I'm workin on desu

>>7580563

He gets shit for being an obscurantist, and I might be inclined to agree. But there's profundity in there too, he just goes out of his way to make it hard to access.

Simulacra and Simulation is probably a high 7 or an 8 in terms of difficulty, 1-10. I'd say it's worth it. I haven't read SotS yet, but it's in the mail. From what I've been able to gather here on lit, it's mostly in the same vein as Baudrillard, sans obscurity.

I could totally see how an analytic autist would want to kill himself after reading Baudrillard. Keep that in mind, and companion works can be very, very useful too.

File: carrshirky.png (67KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 300x225px

>>7580485
Not sure why but my post got deleted?

Check out:
The shallows (And Clay Shirky's other books)
Net Delusion


>Media in general:
Trust Me I'm lying

>>7580700
Seconding Trust Me I'm Lying, that book is amazing. Didn't make it very far into The Shallows though, it was kind of repetitive.

>>7580707
I agree on both counts. I had The Shallows on audiobook so the repetition actually helped me out.

>>7580635
j/w: how many /lit/-specific responses do you have saved for reposting on your computer? I was briefly assailed by a frightening bout of déjà vu, before I realized I had in fact already seen your post before.

and in response to >>7580485, I haven't read SotS, but I second Baudrillard as remaining very relevant for our age, especially since IIRC he described 4 phases of simulation, and he placed Western civ in its 3rd phase at the time S&S was published—somebody needs to check if we have leveled up yet.

>>7580635
Some of Baudrillard's apparent obscurantism comes from the fact that he'll use concepts that he's explained in earlier works without giving any kind of summarized explanation or even pointing you to the text where the concept was first discussed (which becomes especially confusing when he uses a word to mean something that no one else uses it to mean, as he frequently does). He's much easier to understand if you read him chronologically.

Of course, even his early work can be confusing and obscurantist (thankfully to a lesser degree than his later stuff) so understanding him isn't a cakewalk regardless of the order in which you read his texts. And that's a shame because there are some brilliant ideas and observations behind all that obscurity. If there's one thinker I wish wrote more clearly, it's him.

File: baudrillard460.jpg (100KB, 460x300px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 460x300px

Basically everything this man has ever written and Guy Debord.

After you read them you become an enlightened nihilist fazed by nothing.

>>7580715

I've written a very, very similar post before. It was in a reponse to some jack-off claiming it was a 4.

What this little encounter tells us is that we spend entirely too much time shitposting on lit, and too little reading philosophy. If we'd spent half the time we've spent here reading Hegel, we could be professors by now.

The difference between 3rd and 4th order simulacra is primarily that you're trying to forget there's no reality in the 3rd, and you're rolling with this vacuitiy by the 4th. It's basically postmodernity.

I know Baudrillard and Debord, but like OP I would like to know if there are more recent critical works of that tradition that analyze just what has happened in the last decade with the internet, specifically how technology is marketed to kids in order to enact consumption-dependent cultural shifts as they get older.

DFW did an interesting job predicting and satirizing the development of video streaming in the videophone chapter of IJ. Looking for more stuff like that.

>>7580715

There is nothing beyond the 3rd strata of simulation. The third stage is were literally simulation and reality collapse on one another. Presumably beyond that 3rd stage critique of reality would be impossible, since everything would be Hyperreal, that is more than real, It is "sheltered from the imaginary, and from the distinction between the real and the imaginary."

>>7580811
>is were literally

>>7580828

sorry I'm drunk.

>>7580798

I too would like to know about more literature concerning social media.

Baudrillard really hated the internet, so he never took the time to analyse, but from the perspective of mental illness, schizophrenia, and Hypperiality one could have a field day with things like Facebook and 4chan.

Dialectic of enlightenment by Adorno and Horkheimer

>>7580738
You would have never heard of him if he'd written clearly.

>>7580889
>>7580899
>>7580905
>Self glamorization pieces
lmao

>>7580511
Society of the Spectacle is a piece of crypto-marxist rubbish.
It's so obscure and abstract, it can apply to newspapers, television, facebook, my grandma's anus, everything.
It's the allegory of the cave, minus clarity.

>>7580938

lol you autist, it's abstract because it is talking about television, newpapers, politics and what eventually brought us Facebook. These are by nature connected by abstract lines.

Also you say Marxist like that divulges from the essence of what it is talking about, It's one of the best intellectual contributions that was made by Marxist theory.

>>7580844
>and 4chan.
Everything repressed is expressed on 4chan.
4chan is cathartic.
4chan is peace.
4chan, the next Nobel peace Prize.

I'm pretty sure internet is the number one cause of autism

>>7580959
TIME person of the year.

File: af3619b41f.png (155KB, 569x344px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 569x344px

>>7581047
You lost it.

Marshall McLuhan is well worth a read (couple of entertaining bits of footage on youtube as well) if you're interested in this stuff OP. Not new but some of his ideas are pretty prescient and definitely applicable today.

I'll second Alone Together as well, worth a read although a fair amount of it is to do with robots and shit. Still interesting. Started reading a book called The Four-Dimensional Human by Laurence Scott a little while ago but lost interest about a quarter into it. Will probably try to finish it at some point.

>>7580923
I was gonna rec this book, even though it's not Rushkoff's most insightful work. I think Life, Inc had better advice for living a more "connected" life without shit media distracting you.

Cyberia is really his best work though. Probably most relevant to OP's question if OP is willing to eat an eighth of mushrooms and think on it.

>>7580938

Its not that obscure or abstract, if you don't have a shitty attention span its quite easy to follow.

>step up your reading comprehension game senpai

>>7580957
Well, to follow a saying from old Wittgenstein, action is the only way to prove you really mean what you say.
I read Debord in French.
Lately, french anti-establishment pop philosopher Michel Onfray has taken action to publicly defend the voters of the FN, the National Front, accused by mass medias of being fascists.

The reaction of mass medias was to wage a campaign against Onfray, calling him antisemite, racist and other things.

So he went on to attack the traditional image of the french public intellectual, by associating each big name with the cause they chose to defend :
- Alain Badiou : the undocumented workers (pro-immigration, i.e. against the local working class)
- Gille Deleuze : the schizophrenics (a rather small and harmless issue)
- etc

Onfray is a strong supporter of Camus, claiming he's the one who really defended the right causes.

So my question is : behind Debord's obscure theories about the spectacle of the spectacle of the spectacle (claiming he himself is more real than the real real of the real), what did he do with his life?

I claim these guys are obscure on purpose, because they were public University teachers who needed to eat. In order to eat, they had to make sure that none of what they said really *meant* something (else the government would have fired them)

Onfray and Camus aren't / weren't University professors. Is it a coincidence that their writing, far from obscure, was clear and useful?

>You can't be me I'm a rockstar
>I'm riding on the top of a cop car
>I'm a rebel and my .44 pops far
>It's almost over now
Pharell Williams

>>7581103
I lent SoS to a friend from the ENS, it dropped from his hands to.

Also, check out this other, more concrete situationist work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Poverty_of_Student_Life

>>7581120
Uh, where did you get the idea that Debord was a University teacher?

>>7581130
idk. He sounds like one.
I'm reading his wikipedia pages in english and french, it's interesting.
I might give the guy a second chance, I thought he was just another Nanterre, ENS or Vincennes Professor agrégé.

>he wrote on a wall "Ne travaillez jamais" (don't ever work)
funny

The page also says that before Situationism, there was a quarrel with Charlie Chaplin, allegedly corrupted. Interesting stuff.

>>7580485
what's he snorting?

>>7581166
Debord defended Luddism in several texts, including Society of the Spectacle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

I believe that destroying machines is a good idea, and that this,
>The term Luddite fallacy is used by economists in reference to the fear that technological unemployment inevitably generates structural unemployment (and is consequently macroeconomically injurious). If a technological innovation results in a reduction of necessary labour inputs in a given sector, then the industry-wide cost of production falls, which lowers the competitive price and increases the equilibrium supply point which, theoretically, will require an increase in aggregate labour inputs.[29]
is bullshit

>>7581202
>I believe that destroying machines is a good idea
Why? Would you welcome a return to feudalism?

File: freedom from want.jpg (592KB, 1199x1557px) Image search: [Google]

592KB, 1199x1557px

>>7581205
I'm desperate for a job.
For now I don't care about feudalism or freedom, I just want some food, a roof and being part of society. Can't find steady work, so I live in shame. I rage against immigrants, but the machines probably replaced more human beings than immigrants. (even in Foxconn (iphones factory, china), they're about to replace humans with machines)

Also, this : Rebels against the future https://books.google.fr/books?id=kNnmrkJFQ5cC&hl=en
(a story, from Luddism to the computer age)

File: Rebels-Against-the-Future-cover.jpg (581KB, 1224x1869px) Image search: [Google]

581KB, 1224x1869px

>>7581224

>>7581224
It's time to move past work. >>7581224
Base salary for everyone at eighteen = 1500 euros,
Roof salary = 6 000 euros because no one needs more.

>>7581224
I'm in the opposite position, I'm desperate to stay on welfare ('m European and I'm guessing you're American.) but these fucks want me to get a job because they still have the idea that everyone should work while, as you say, there isn't enough work to go around.

We should get over the idea that everyone should have to work as far as I'm concerned, because holding back technology is impossible. If people let go of their 19th century work ethic and embrace a decent welfare state with a basic income for every citizen life would become a lot more pleasant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Luddism

>Neo-Luddism or New Luddism is a philosophy opposing many forms of modern technology.[1] The word Luddite is generally used as a derogatory term applied to people showing technophobic leanings.[2] The name is based on the historical legacy of the British Luddites, who were active between 1811 and 1816.[1]
>Neo-Luddism is a leaderless movement of non-affiliated groups who resist modern technologies and dictate a return of some or all technologies to a more primitive level.[3] Neo-Luddites are characterized by one or more of the following practices: passively abandoning the use of technology, harming those who produce technology, advocating simple living, or sabotaging technology. The modern Neo-Luddite movement has connections with the anti-globalization movement, anarcho-primitivism, radical environmentalism and Deep Ecology.[3]
>Neo-Luddism is based on the concern of the technological impact on individuals, their communities and or the environment,[4] Neo-Luddism stipulates the use of the precautionary principle for all new technologies

>>7581242
>Base salary for everyone at eighteen = 1500 euros
>>7581252
>I'm desperate to stay on welfare
Well, the question is how much one makes on welfare.
I get only 300€ (after rent). Sure, as I'm quite independent as a person, I'm not desperate for a job to kill time and be like everyone. I have many projects, 1500€ would be nice to finance this.
But yes, universal income would be an alternative solution to destroying machines.
All I know is that for now, the rat race is absurd.

>>7581280
Sounds like you already have a roof and some food, then. All you need is to get over your sense of feeling ashamed of not having work in a society where there is no work to be had.

>>7581300
Food is not the problem, t.bh.

>>7581300
300€/month here means misery. Sure, stupid guilt feelings are a bitch, but even without this, I'd be ashamed of misery.
I realize you just can't socialize without money. You want to do theater? You have to pay a teacher. You want to play a sport with other human beings? You have to pay a big subscription.
One idea I have, as I have a roof (for now) would be to propose free theater lessons at my place.
Who needs an acting teacher ? (if not for his possible network)
The craziest thing is that you have to pay them... to obey them...
Also I'd like to do this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_theatre
(sorry for derailing the thread...)

>>7581338
aka Theater of the Oppressed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_of_the_Oppressed

It's a sort of peaceful guerilla technique to use theater to help oppressed people express themselves.

>>7580700
>>7580707
i'm about half way through Trust Me, I'm Lying now. A lot of it stuff I already assumed was going on in the first place, but it's nice to see examples

File: diogenes gibsmedat.jpg (49KB, 600x461px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x461px

>>7581338
Depends on your idea of misery I guess, m8. To socialise you just need to hang out with people and maybe some cans of cheap lager from the supermarket. To play a sport all you need is a football and an empty patch of grass. As for theatre I haven't a clue, I admit, being being a poorfag doesn't have to mean being miserable.

>>7581422
>To socialise you just need to hang out with people and maybe some cans of cheap lager from the supermarket.
If your target peer group is alcoholics, bar flies and hookers, then cheap lager sounds great.

Also - "hang out with people", kek. That may be reasonable in college, but "adults" have already developed a number of ingrained notions and beliefs which they will use in order to ostracize you if you don't fit in. I'm saying this from an Eastern European perspective, can't imagine how bad it is in the US.

>>7581482
So your idea of misery is not being a middle class normie then?

>>7581587
It's not, but the above advice is shit and doesn't work. Giving out booze won't earn you friends, nor will "hanging out with people" in order to socialize (which is like saying that in order to drink water you need to drink water).

>>7581600
All I mean is that things like company and exercise don't have to cost money. Before industrialisation people's idea of recreation was drinking cheap booze and frolicking in the fields as well, so if you don't want to end up like that you'd better leave those machines be.

>>7581622
I tried to find hitchhiking partners for a trip to Morocco last year, and most people wouldn't settle for anything less than a three star hotel with fucking wifi.

>>7581654

you're looking for people in the wrong places, then. there are people out there who are down to travel on the cheap.

File: matchpoint.jpg (36KB, 628x419px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 628x419px

>>7581422
Someone ITT wants to play ping pong with me in Paris? :))

>>7582028
I met someone on a local version of social phobia dot com.
He's middle class, but he didn't mind to take a bus (coach) to go to Amsterdam, where we planted our tent.
7 hours for 600km, but three times cheaper than the train!
Plus it spares money for the red district.

Not a thesis in the vein of Debord, but this anthology on network theory has some interesting articles:

http://dss-edit.com/plu/Galloway-Thacker_The_Exploit_2007.pdf

File: 1444790381623-2.png (772KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

772KB, 900x675px

>>7581252
>>7581300

You don't have to work at all. You can completely check out, but you can't expect people to provide food for you.

That's not society, that's nature.


As bad an opinion I had of you, you're on to something with
>One idea I have, as I have a roof (for now) would be to propose free theater lessons at my place.
You could even propose to teach or to assist somewhere in exchange for free renting the back office as a bunk.

>>7581482
You have such an enlightened perception of yourself as a tortured genius who is above all society, yet you despair you're not average.

What do you want? What would be the ideal scenario that would make you happy? (Spoilers: you're still going to find the same number of problems with it. Unhappiness is mindset not scenario)

tl;dr read more, of something good not most of what /lit/ recommends. Something useful not nihilistic, psudo poplit, meme books.
>I only read infinite jets and finnegans wake in sweedish translations
try greek stoicis; seneca / epictetus

>>7582202
I would, I really would but I'm in Toulouse.

>>7584983
>You don't have to work at all. You can completely check out, but you can't expect people to provide food for you.
>That's not society, that's nature.
A lot of the times you can though since people feel like providing for each other.

>>7580775
> an enlightened nihilist fazed by nothing

How so?

>>7585107
It's possible on small and temporary scales, but it's an overall drag on that tribe. Like a cancerous cell.

>>7584983
>You have such an enlightened perception of yourself as a tortured genius who is above all society, yet you despair you're not average.
I wrote literally nothing which could've directed a sane person to a conclusion like yours. You either confused me with another anon (I wrote only that single post) or like to project your insecurities on others.

And that Black Sun, lmao. Are you a libertarian-pagan, by any chance?

>>7585459

This was the post the second part is directed to: >>7581482
If that's not you, disregard. If it is,

You don't see how implying all beer drinkers are alcoholics, bar flies and hookers, is pretentious and is a way to project yourself as above it?

You continue to point out how 'adults have already developed ingrained beliefs to ostracize you.' Which is just what you did in the previous statement.

>>7585500
>You don't see how implying all beer drinkers are alcoholics, bar flies and hookers, is pretentious and is a way to project yourself as above it?

I never claimed that, work on your reading comprehension.

>You continue to point out how 'adults have already developed ingrained beliefs to ostracize you.' Which is just what you did in the previous statement.

There was nothing about "me" in that statement, it's just that I've lived in several capital cities and belonged to various peer groups. It's not hard to notice the bounds and consequences for crossing them, hence the "fit in" part.

>>7585425
We don't live in tribes now though, we live in very efficient industrialised society where less than half of the people work.

>>7585500
Up your comprehension I said implied it. Because you discredited social drinking by saying "yeah that works great if your target is alcoholics"

>>7586144
Of course we do, we exist in multiple at once now. Your family is a tribe, your coworkers are a tribe, your neighborhood, etc. All the way up to country and race.

>society where less than half of the people work
We probably have different definitions of work and contributions to society. No group can function where half the people contribute nothing.

Anon that wanted to teach theater maybe isn't generating revenue, but he's working.

An inner city mother that keeps pooping out kids to get welfare is not.

If you go live in the mountains off the land somewhere, you're working but for yourself in a tribe of 1.

>>7586202
meant to reply to >>7585525 in the first part not >>7585500

>>7586202
You fucking mong, telling people to buy "cheap lager" (i.e. low quality) and to hang out with others (good riddance, trying to harass random people by offering them piss to drink) is not "encouraging social drinking". Learn to form coherent, unequivocal arguments and then contribute to the thread.