Final Post

Technology has been both a source of Enjoyment and Hatred. It also has shaped my life, but it has also made me questions about its well-being, and boundaries that must be established with it.

The Lure of Connectivity 

My first social media was Instagram. At the being, I was excited about connecting with friends and discovering the wider world. At first, it felt like a space where every photo, post, and interaction was to be enjoyed with a global community. But as my feeds grew busier, so did my thoughts. The phenomenon of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) soon became a silent companion of mine. Social media began to fuel my FoMO more and more, creating a cycle of comparison and self-evaluation. I found myself scrolling endlessly, feeling left out of experiences I didn’t even know I wanted. The curated lives of others on Instagram painted a picture-perfect reality that felt unattainable. Social media also fed my anxiety and validation, tying self-worth to likes, shares, and comments.

The Cost of Convenience

While technology is convenient, it comes with hidden costs. While reading The Atlantic, Facebook Users Still Don’t Know, It showed how tech giants like Facebook monetize personal data. Reflecting on my usage of platforms like these, I’ve realized how willingly I’ve handed over my personal information in exchange for "free" services: email addresses, birthdays, and preferences to create a digital footprint that companies use to their advantage. The data breaches, like the exposure of Facebook users, have made me question my digital safety. How much control do I have over my online identity? Even more alarming, reports of companies asking users for email passwords highlight the invasive extent to which data is collected.

The Psychological Toll

Technology has brought with it not only security risks but also emotional and psychological impacts. Social media, in particular, plays role in connection while feeling isolation. The constant stream of updates, notifications, and endless feeds often left me feeling more disconnected than connected, wanting genuine interactions instead of fleeting digital exchanges. Research on the topic, like the article Social Media in the Adult Population: Potential Outcomes and Its Relationship with Self-Esteem and Well-Being, shows how social media use can impact mental health. Feelings of inadequacy, social anxiety, and a compulsive need to staying in the loop are challenges I’ve dealt with  firsthand.

A Journey Towards Mindfulness

As I became more aware of the challenges technology has in my life, I started seeking ways to use it more mindfully. Mindful consumption, as explored in the article Mindful Consumption and FoMO in Generation Z, inspired me to take control of my digital habits. Setting time limits on social media, turning off non-essential notifications, and scheduling screen-free periods became small but significant steps toward reclaiming my time and focus. Digital detoxes, however brief, have been transformative. They’ve allowed me to rediscover the joys of analog experiences playing card games, going for a walk, or just existing in the moment. They reminded me that while technology makes life better, it should not dominate it.

Looking Ahead

Reflecting on my relationship with technology, I see it as a continuous journey of learning and adaptation. I'm reminded that the challenges of the digital age are shared across generations. Technology will always be a part of our lives, but how we engage with it is a choice. Moving forward, I aspire to deepen my intentional use of technology focusing on quality,  presence, and privacy. Whether it’s connections, boundaries, or advocating for more ethical tech practices, my relationship with technology will remain a work in progress, with awareness and purpose. In the end, the question isn’t whether technology is good or bad it’s about how we choose to navigate it. For me, the answer lies in finding harmony between the digital and the human, using technology as a tool to enrich life without compromising the essence of living.

EOTO Presentation #2 Reaction

Listening to the presentation it got me thinking about how we consume information every day. The gatekeeping and agenda setting team had me with this analogy: imagine being one of only 300 people with exclusive access to the world’s greatest multiplayer game. Then, suddenly, it’s made available to everyone, and you no longer have control over who joins. limiting access to something special is similar to how gatekeeping works in media, but on a much larger scale. Gatekeeping, at its core, is about deciding what gets shown to the public and what doesn’t. Early research, like David Manning White’s classic study of a newspaper editor’s decision-making, showed how personal biases and organizational goals influence these choices. This process is necessary in the world of news because no outlet can cover everything. But it’s not just about choosing the most “newsworthy” stories it’s about curating content to align with specific
narratives. For instance, some media outlets might prioritize feel-good stories or sensational headlines while downplaying critical issues.

They also introduced the idea of agenda-setting, which builds on gatekeeping. While gatekeeping determines what’s available to read or watch, agenda-setting shapes what we think about and how we think about it. I hadn’t realized how much power media holds to influence our priorities until this was explained. For example, if news outlets continuously highlight a celebrity scandal but ignore rising poverty rates, it’s not just a reflection of what sells it’s a deliberate choice that shifts public focus. I found the distinction between the two levels of agenda-setting fascinating. On one level, it’s about bringing issues to our attention things we might otherwise ignore. But on the second level, it’s about how those issues are framed: Are they portrayed as urgent or a systemic problem? This impacts how we perceive and respond to events in the world.

They delved into how gatekeeping can sometimes be driven by political or commercial interests. For instance, media owned by corporations or closely tied to political figures might choose stories that benefit their stakeholders while ignoring or twisting stories that don’t align with their agendas. This isn’t just a theoretical concern it’s something that happens regularly and can lead to public mistrust or even the spread of misinformation. After hearing all this, I couldn’t help but think about how I interact with the news. I tend to stick with a few trusted sources, but the presentation made me realize how dangerous that can be. If those sources gatekeeping, I might not be getting the full picture. To counter this, there was an emphasis on importance of diversifying where we get our information. Reflecting on this, I’m now more aware of the role gatekeeping and agenda-setting play in shaping what I know and what I don’t. It’s a powerful reminder that the stories we see are just the tip of the iceberg, carefully chosen and framed by people with their own priorities. Being more critical about the media we consume is one step toward breaking out of these invisible filters.