The Tyranny of Other People’s Vacation Photos (2016)
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
E.g. new mother shares endless stream of baby photos while most of her 20-something ex-college friends/coworkers are oversaturated with it. (E.g. the sentiment that if you've seen one blob of an undifferentiated poop machine in diapers, you've seen them all.) Yes, the infant is The Most Interesting Person In The World to that mother so it seems logical to her that others would find her posted photos to be interesting too.
On a large scale, we simply have no self-awareness about our narcissism and its banality to others.
Long before the existence of the internet and Facebook in the days of film photography, hosts would torture their dinner guests by having them gather in the living room and flip through slides[1] of the hosts' vacation. The guests silently suffer through the boring presentation but of course, etiquette means nobody would dare say, "Joe, this is boring and we're going home now." Polite society on a large-scale, self-censors the expression of boredom which perversely continues the large-scale unawareness that sharing too many personal highlights is subjecting friends to cruel & unusual punishment.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=kodak+slide+carousel+slide+p...
I'd turn this around and say, if you're annoyed by pictures of other peoples' kids or their vacations or what they ate, maybe you're the narcissistic one. In a modern world where people often move far away from friends and family to pursue careers, Facebook fills in for a lot of the shared experience that people would otherwise have. I want to see pictures of my friends baby, because I can't visit her often on the opposite coast. I want to see the latest food my father in law put in the smoker, because I can't drop in to steal a sample. I'm interested in the lives of my friends and family and Facebook let's me at least keep a bit in touch with what's happening.
I don't doubt that there are people that genuinely enjoy others' baby photos. However, I wouldn't be able to tell which comments left on each others' pages were expressions of authentic sincerity instead of mindless reflexes of etiquette.
That said, this Reddit thread[1] highlights a collective exasperation that clearly comes from somewhere.
Likewise, there are surely some who enjoy others vacation slideshows (e.g. Retric in this thread) but again, there's a widespread rejection of them[2] that comes from somewhere. People won't complaint directly to the posters face -- e.g. they won't write on the posters wall to "stop flooding the feed with your stupid vacation photos". People are generally too polite to do that.
>, maybe you're the narcissistic one.
It's not about me. It's about observing social dynamics:
1) People overestimate the parts of their personal lives that are interesting to others
2) People are silent or insincerely praise the over-sharing of others' personal highlights
Those 2 factors create a weird/interesting feedback cycle that transcends Facebook/Instagram/Snapchat. It's been happening long before that.
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/rtapw/my_facebook_ne...
[2] http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2017/06/29/no-one-wants-to-see...
Clearly there are people who don't like pictures of peoples' vacations or kids enough to bitch on Reddit about it. I'd call those people narcissists. Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: your kid, your vacation, your new job, your walk by the river, even your political opinions. Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic. What narcissistic is when you post that stuff yourself, but can't empathize with others enough not to be annoyed when they do it.
Yes, I've already acknowledge that people like you exist but it's not relevant to what I was discussing. But let's continue on that example you gave...
>if I consistently like pictures of your kid it means I want to see them on my feed.
Right... but when a person complains to her friends that "nobody 'likes' her posts", it then causes some of them to start "liking" the posts just to get her to shut up. This type of dynamic contributes to the phenomenon I'm talking about.
>Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: [...] Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic.
You're reducing the topic to an absolutism which is not what I'm talking about even though I took great care in the first post to properly qualify the social phenomenon: over-sharing instead of just sharing and "too many personal highlights" instead of just "personal highlights". The NYT author did the same when he wrote, "_excessive_ posting of these pictures".
Yes, Facebook is inherently about sharing... just as an old slide carousel is about sharing film photos. The respective technologies' purpose is not the point.
To restate... There is a widespread social phenomenon: many of us share more than the audience wants to see. It has a perverse feedback mechanism (social grooming, white lies, polite self-censorship, self-ignorance, etc) that perpetuates the phenomenon across different media (e.g. film slides to Facebook). (This disconnect between posters' (non)curation vs audience receptiveness is also mentioned at the end of the NYT article when the author wrote, "I am trying to calibrate my photographic output. As we all should.")
I think that's interesting observation to talk about. Maybe your issue is the word "narcissism"? I used that term because that seems to have the most currency.[1] If there's a better word, make a suggestion. If bringing up the topic itself is toxic and shouldn't be discussed, please explain why.
[1] examples: https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+narcissism
I'm too old and a(media)social to know the platforms people use these days, but I guess those platforms don't lend themselves to the writing of large insightful essays. On a bus. With a phone. And I think most people won't, anyway.
I think you really need to be a certain kind of person to want to see and reply something trite to every picture of your "inner circle"; as I'm really on the other side of that spectrum, I can't really understand the motivation of the replier or happiness of the content poster. If you want to kill yourself, please come and talk to me, but please don't bore/harass me with pictures of your breakfast. I have a baby girl; I don't understand why I'd post pictures and check how many people like them. I don't see the value; (to me) it's nothing more but a social charade.
Maybe I'm too far on the autistic spectrum to be certain types of social.
Luckily, when you don't crave the attention yourself, you don't have to be part of the game.
I'd much rather look at pictures of your kids than read your "insightful essays." Most essays, even ones appearing in respectable publications, are little more than a patchwork of spin, guessing, and questionable assumptions connected with questionable reasoning.[1]
I'm probably on the other side of the spectrum, but I don't really want to hear your ideas. I want to share your human experiences. That feeling when you watch your toddler develop enough motor skills to pick up food, but not enough to put it in her mouth. The happiness at your wedding. Your pride at cooking a meal for your family. Those are the things that are real, genuine, and true.
[1] Think about how inaccurate every article you read in the press is about any scientific topic you come across. They are no more accurate about the topics you know less about. For example, this article has been making the rounds on my Facebook: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/07/canada-.... It's based entirely on a false premise: that because U.S. tax rates are lower than in Canada, U.S. public spending is lower. In reality, per-capita non-military public spending in the U.S. is quite significantly higher than in Canada. And this is a "respectable" author appearing in a "respectable" publication! This is the trash clogging up the Internet; not baby pictures.
I guess it's about your mind. I want to decipher the world, in scientific terms, and I don't care about personal angles. Yes, you have to filter a lot of opinion and filler, but I want real information. I probably could live easier without personal information at all than without interesting stuff to study.
Mind you, I'm somewhat on the autistic scale, and I am well aware that most people have a greater need for personal connection and social inclusion. I can't look at pictures of a social event and not see the mechanics behind the behaviours, like it's hard to enjoy a movie if you can't suspend disbelief. To me, a baby trying to eat is mostly just an image of neurons trying to organise. I don't understand wedding pictures because I don't understand marriage, why people have to go through a weird social routine/tradition to declare that they want to be together. I have feelings and emotions of course, but stuff gets very boring very quickly if there's no "actual" information to go with it.
Yep, I do remember some of the most fierce fights against falling asleep in those occasions.
But - to give some sociological insight - those terrible after dinners came out because of sheer convenience.
Till then there were "pictures" (not slides) that costed a lot of money to print in a decently large format, so typically you took less shots, then had them printed in a very small format, and only reprinted a handful out of each roll.
With slides the costs were a fraction, even considering the cost (rather high for today's standards) of the projector and of the carousels.
Now what if someone (not the government as it would be anti-democratic, not google as it would be a dominant position abuse, etc.) would put a minimal cost for publishing on the net these images (let's say 0.50 US$/apiece, of course devolved entirely to a non-profit/humanitariaon association)?
I would bet that in no time we would have the amount of those photos reduced to 1/20th or less.
http://www.art.net/Studios/Hackers/Hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-d...
One of the nice things about being away is that you're away. That you're forced out of your routine, unable to keep up with the same day-to-day stuff as usual, and cut off from your friends. It forces you to make new friends.
Travel for me used to be a good hack to overcome a natural tendency toward introversion. At some point, after not speaking to a human for a few days, I would go in to Emergency Survival Social Mode, where I had to strike up a conversation with the person at the next table right that minute just to preserve my sanity. And nearly every time I'd find that that person was going through the same thing and was thus happy to chat about whatever for a while.
That's a lot harder to do now, when everybody sitting alone at a table has their phone out, facebooking away with their friends at home as per normal.
I don't know what the solution will be. Hopefully the pendulum will swing back and people will realize that it's nice to disconnect for real from time to time. Especially when there is real sand between their toes and a real sunset going on in front of them (and a real girl sitting at the next table).
But the person has no idea, hence they post oblivious to whether there are real people who actually want to see it.
They post instantly, assume everyone likes it, instant hit achieved. Due to politeness (And the subliminal voting circle) people like back at some stage.
The arguable point is whether the superficial voting circle of Facebook works and makes people happy or it's a drug we get dependent on and just need.
It takes a pretty dedicated introvert to not need even a little human company after a while.
In the old days, there was that moment when visiting someone's house (friend, relative maybe) and the topic of family vacations came up. Then someone suggests the slide projector. You could almost feel the silent "uggh" from the people who were not on the vacation. The worst part would be the unknown length of the slide show. (ten minutes? two hours?) But setting up the slide projector was a fair effort, so it could easily be put off "until next time you come over" (phew! Dodged a bullet!)
Now you just pop them up on FB and they are there for all to see. Compound that with the fact that FB's sharing controls are so complicated that actually just sharing with a particular subset (immediate family, grandparents, etc) is nigh impossible for ordinary mortals and there you are! Bazillions of terrible family photos a click away, or worse: a scroll away, no click needed.
Physical photos did have some advantages: at least they could be avoided! ;D
Still have our old carousel with "ten best" and latest trip.
But what that also did was drastically reduce family shared memories and stories to those precious slides. Reliving again for each generation.
Now, ubiquity of photos equalize all events to the same stature and,imo, lose group family memories of those few great events (whether or not they were indeed great)
If they would set up projector, you would have to either watch it or say openly you dont want to watch them. Meanwhile, on facebook you just scroll past all that. Eventually you can click on something other people post and facebook will show you more of that in the future. Moreover people typically post them in albums. If you dont click album. You dont spend time watching pictures.
Unless of course, mere remainder of existence of such thing annoys you.
Both are perfectly usable and I can still have a social life, but it's not as effortless as just scrolling down so you tend to do it less and stop when you stop caring (well I do anyway). Definitely dialed back the background anxiety levels when I did that.
To some people is just a splinter, to others, well, you get the idea.
This is okay.
I liked her method until I realized she recorded it to put on Facebook. Almost thought it was some sort of way to cope without being on Facebook.
People ARE way too addicted to that red notification symbol.
I take a lot of photos usually, and they act as something like an extension of my memory, a journal. To show them to someone else is an intimate thing.
If someone else's joy makes you feel bad, you need to take a look at yourself.
If what you see of other is biased, that biases your answer to that question, and thus biases your introspection towards "I should be doing better".
Travel is one of a handful of subjects/topics you can start with the range from total stranger to yourself.
People love to talk travel and it often allows them to be brought out. In this day and age of sides, travel has none
The others are weather and genealogy
I think that's part of the reason ticket prices have gone through the roof for sporting events. Before, you were only motivated to go to a game based on 1) your desire to see the event live, and 2) your immediate circle of friends and family who you could tell.
Now, all of your outer circle of friends, including the people you went to school with, ex's, etc get to see how well you're living life, how successful you are, etc.
It's really quite annoying and obnoxious.
Having taken a break from social media for about 3 months now, I'm realizing just how evil it is.