Rough Draft [HW #18]

Digital technology has, without a doubt, an engulfing effect. Digitalization has taken over many aspects of our lives. The things we see, the things we listen to, the way we interact- they have all been manipulated so that it can be more accessible to us through digital representational devices (DRDs). Anyone would, of course, tell you that they are well aware that these stimulations are not authentic and are distorting our perception of world. There is a consensus about the effect of digitalization; most people would agree with what has been said so far. However, we continue to obsessively use these DRDs, neglecting our realizations about digitalization- as though, our thoughts should not matter when we're submerging ourselves into this world. We are imprisoned by our own way of digitalization. We knowingly continue to live our faux-lives, returning to our internet profiles regardless of what our thoughts and feelings tell us.

“That’s just how it is” (Interviewee). There is a general belief that digitalization is engraved into our lifestyles. We believe that since digitalization has such a lasting role thus far, it is here to stay. We have already come to accept it as a part of life- as a medium that connects us with society and the rest of the world. Without it, we will fail to succeed in society socially and economically, or at least that is what we believe. Even now, as I am writing this essay on my blog, I feel as though my desire to succeed academically is binding me to the computer. Digital technology is now perceived as a necessity, rather than a privilege. In a way, it has become the way to communicate; everything else is marginal. We’ve taken in DRDs as a major part of our lives, because we directly associate communication with DRDs. And we constantly return to DRDs because if we were to forfeit them, we would be forfeiting our way of communication, and our connections with the rest of the world.

There is an expectation that everyone has to act as a reflection of the positive energy that other people send them. And most people try to meet this expectation. Everyone has to be nice, everyone has to be charming, everyone has to be funny, and everyone has “lol” after every dumb statement. If done successfully, the person’s chances of developing a more “intimate” relationship with the other person. But of course, hardly anyone can act this way all the time- unless they’re on the internet. We are, for the most part, well aware that we put on these false identities when we’re chatting away online. “You have no idea who you are, so you're experiment which one is more likeable” (John L). We want to be liked, so we project ourselves in whatever form that will appeal to more people. And when we’re online, our identities are more easily adjustable. However, when we’re in the outside world, such an alteration is not as accessible; in that, we are much more perceivable. If a person allows their internet profiles completely overlap their physical lives, they would be called a “fake” or a “phony,” at least that’s what my observations have told me. We return to DRDs and the internet, because that would never be the issue. Everyone is trying to act nice, and managing their coolness. No one will ever try to blow off anyone’s mask, because they’re so preoccupied in trying to project their own. Your faux-identities are safe, and forever-growing

DRDs have their benefits as well; therefore it is okay for us to use them. If we emphasize on them enough, we have a legitimate excuse to continue on this path to doom. In Everything Bad is Good For You, Johnson mentions on several occasions that we are the ones in control. When we are watching television, playing video games, or using the internet, we are the manipulators not the manipulated. Through DRDs, we are “learning to lead.” Of course this is, to some extent true. We do these things based on our own senses of judgment. And based on Johnson’s argument, “it’s not about tolerating or aestheticizing chaos; it’s about finding order and meaning in the world, and making decisions that help create that order” (62). We are constantly stimulating our brains through DRDs, and making sense of the situation provided by them. From my experience, I never sought to play video games, or to watch television in hopes of “finding order and meaning in the world.” I just do them because it’s part of my connection with other people. These distractions act as common grounds for people to network in. However, if we keep believing that video games, television, and the internet yield such great benefits (I’m not saying that they don’t hold any at all), we can continue to be consumed by DRDs, without feeling any guilt. We can return to our DRDs, because now we have an excuse to.

There is always a tug that draws us back to DRDs. This tug may not be a strong one, as it is not something forces us to return to our digital homes, but we do allow ourselves to give into it.