Week 2

"How One Stupid Tweet Ruined Justine Sacco's Life"

This week's article looked at the severity of one's digital footprint. I picked up on how unforgiving the internet is. The story shows how once a person is branded online, they are branded forever. Years later, Sacco's name is still tied to that tweet. Such permanence feels out of proportion to the mistake. If the internet stays on this track, we may be fostering a culture of fear instead of one that encourages growth and learning.

Additionally, this reading shows how intent is fragile once brought online. It is often difficult to express emotions like sarcasm through a computer screen, especially once detached from tone or context. Sacco claimed she was mocking ignorance, but her sarcasm collapsed once put online. Once she made her post, all that mattered was how the internet interpreted her words, regardless of what she meant. This gap between intent and perception is never-racking, because it suggests any of us could be taken out of context and punished, with no chance to clarify. We see it happen online all the time with people getting "cancelled", before they have the chance to speak up. 

I found myself connecting this story back to my own life, and how I am very cautious about what I post on the media, as you never know how it will be interpreted. But it feels like that defeats the purpose of the internet and social media, where you are meant to express yourself. 

"Reclaiming Conversation in the Age of AI"

Reading Turkle's article a decade later feels strange, as though she had foreshadowed what is now reality. She explains how new AI has become more than a tool, and has turned into a robot who acts as though they care. The chatbot mimics human-like actions, such as speaking, and then pausing, conveying a sense of concern. Although this seems small, it is conveying emotion as though it is a real person. As Turkle calls it, "artificial intimacy" messes with the human mind, and becomes attractive, especially in times of loneliness or stress. The reason for this is because AI is smooth flowing, with no conflict, awkward pauses, and vulnerability, that real human conversations are made up of. 

I resonated especially with her reflection on the pandemic, as it was something that impacted me heavily. During quarantine, everyone turned to their screens to help feel less alone, as we all were craving human interaction. Technology helped us fill the gaps, but wasn't able to substitute the rawness and unpredictability of being with others.

I didn't read Turkle's article as rejecting technology, but more as urging us to use it with purpose. She reminds us that real conversations are necessary everyday, whether it is in the grocery store, at the dinner table, or just among friends, is something we must maintain. Society today prioritizes convenience and efficiency, resulting in the loss of emotional connection.

Will humans stop choosing human connection when the machine version is so simple?