The group of students at the beginning of the video said, “Our generation uses Facebook and claims to want to show one’s true self.” We post our hobbies, likes, and lives on social media. However, is it really that we want people to know who we really are? I think the answer is no. Instead, most people in the video like to post on social media because they want to become popular. The more likes you have, the better you feel. Everyone sees how many likes you get and how popular you are. For example, lots of people posted funny videos just to earn subscribers on YouTube.

Social media is all about sharing, and it give its user the empowerment. For example, Tyler Oakley would probably never been known by millions of people if there was no YouTube. Sharing his videos on YouTube allowed him be exposed to a much larger pool of audience. Another example is Steven, the young skateboarder. Since Steven got thousands views on YouTube and become popular, he started to get sponsorships from lots of brands. Without this platform, it is hard to imagine Steven can be known by any company.

As we use our sharing power to re-tweet or like a Facebook page of a company, we are being a marketer of those companies. For example, when our generation like a pop star, a company, it becomes part of our identity. Kayley Lyn spent hours to re-tweeting for Hunger Games. Essentially, she simply wanted to show her identity that she is actually a fan of Hunger Games. Therefore, we as consumers, can actually become the most hard working marketers for companies. In addition, by looking at who shared, who liked their pages, companies gather demographic data about its potential consumers. Company knows how to use the data to create value for themselves because by getting a re-tweet may help a company for maybe a million sales.

I always had a gut feeling that likes would turn into money someday after I’ve seen a lot of social media upgrade their site with the like button or share. This video proved that to be quite true. The way social media works is really smart. They utilize the fact that “famous” people with a lot of likes can help endorse their brand and they will sponsor the person with clothes, shoes, and much more so it could be shown in their videos or pictures. On the other hand, ultra die-hard fans will always be an advocate for their fandom. They will help you market for free and they earn points, as shown with the biggest fan of Hunger Games.

I felt a little disturbed at the end when a young girl who started her journey to become “famous” through youtube videos wanted more likes and more views. Her mother did what she was supposed to do (which was support her child), but I believe that she was exploiting her child to the world. She even stated that if she takes a full body picture of her daughter, it would garner a lot of likes. Keep in mind that the girl is still a minor. I think it would be okay if the pictures were taken with more creativity but, there is no need for a random full body picture.

I think teenagers want the attention, which they get through likes and shares. Youtubers are aware that their videos are going viral, but that’s exactly what they want. They want to become famous and receive all the attention they can get through their videos. As they continue their journey, they will be paid, get free things, garner attention and get numerous offers, just by making videos alone. I think it’s a great idea if this is what teenagers these days are looking for but they should also be careful with what they post because once it’s on the web, it will be there forever.

This video was extremely enlightening at least for me. I’ve liked videos, articles and posts I came across online in the past and recently. Sometimes I share them or post them on my Face Book account so my friends can access them. I’ve never thought more of it beyond just showing what I think is entertaining or funny, but now after seeing this video I have a different “appreciation” for how my opinion is used.

To me in the end the winners of Generation Like are the marketing companies and manufacturers etc (adults). The kids get something out of it I guess, but its almost like regurgitated desires and wants anyway, because by participating in the “game” of likes, re-tweets, shares, etc they are just telling adults what to give them or do to make them happy. The seemingly massive movement of kids online seeking validation and “fame” is actually disturbing to me. It seems that nothing much is left untapped in their desire to gain likes etc. The 13 year old Steven Fernandez started doing skate videos but went further by making videos involving scantily clad women and lewd behavior. It might seem to many that the videos are funny and some of Steven’s videos are “harmless” fun but some are not and a 13 year kid making and posting those kinds of videos seems less than funny to me. What then becomes his limit, how far is he willing to go to gain more likes?

Of course there are positives such as teens or former teens creating new opportunities using social media and helping to turn the old mode of Marketer > Consumer on its ear. I also like that it provides another option for new artists to gain fans which in turn can be leveraged into deals and sponsorships. It’s refreshing to see that kids have some power to shape the way marketers and manufacturers put out content, but at the same time I worry about the fact that what they think is spontaneous and driven by them is actually “engineered” to seem that way.

Generation Like seems to be caught in a loop as noted in the video but is the loop good for them or for the adults? It seems to me that a lot of kids are “working” for free in the hopes of gaining seemingly instant fame. Many, many more are doing so for the chance that same celebrity will respond and make them famous by association. I think too much potential danger or harm exists in this kind of behavior and I worry about predators and other dangerous people on the internet who can use these forums to lure or harm kids. I also worry about the less than confident kids who seek validation and get depressed etc by a lack of “likes”. How is all of this affecting them? I like the idea of letting others know what we “like”, but attaching so much meaning to it is a little overboard in my opinion. (I might just be showing my age here)

The idea that social media is revolving around our lives is crazy. We help social media with our content, abilities, and skills to be the “heart of the marketing campaign” without even knowing it. The generation nowadays are interested with getting more and more likes or so I call it to be “accepted” by strangers from social media. The more people who follow, like, share your post, the easier it is to advertise. Now, famous YouTubers get money when they get million likes/views. They are not the only ones, most actors/actresses/companies who are already famous use social media to promote themselves even bigger. For example, the tricky advertisement of Trident Gum by trying to get people to post a video and they picked one video to be published online. Some teenagers don’t know what or who they expose themselves to, which might be dangerous.

I think the winner in all of this is everyone. Some people who are determined to make it big can produce money and sponsorship. Everything that people like on social media is being exposed to more ads, suggestions, apps, and items. People who post many things on social media are being watched and most of them aren’t aware of it. People who get famous over social media are attached to them to get attention and want more. Everyone is being exploited. I don’t think teens are aware when they’re used in the marketing techniques. I agree with Rushkoff that this doesn’t last forever because society gets bored easily and things keep moving with life.

With the use of social media, I have never known of how seriously people took into account of how many “likes, shares, retweets, etc” they got. I also thought of social media of a place to connect and to interact with people who lie outside of one’s inner circle. The documentary on how social media and its importance shows a clear depiction on how today’s generation interact and gain easy access to anything one wants.

With social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, etc., anyone can sign up and gain easy access to connecting with his/her friends, interest groups, and so on. As seen in the video, today’s social media network not only allows users to converse but also allows users to follow, like, share, and repost/retweet anything or anyone of whom the user shows interest in. By showing an act of interest in such way, the social media network and other affiliated networks/sponsors/etc. will gain access to the user’s interests and likes, and thus will attain a data of related items that will overall represent the self of the user. By tracking how many clicks on ‘like’, ‘share’, ‘repost/retweet’ buttons, the social media network and its affiliates will gain a general idea of what users are attracted to and will thus exploit these users to relevant companies.

Today’s generation is exposing themselves to the media at very early ages. Without parental consents, today’s generation can unthinkably expose themselves out into the world of social media, which can cause many problems. However, on the flip side, I think today’s generation should be very fortunate for the easy access to connect and interact within such social media networks!

Dimensions of social media and its impact is changing everyday. ‘Generation Like’ video gives us a clear picture about the future. Going through business degree in Baruch College, I was constantly taught that success is rooted in networking. In this video however it takes a whole new level.

Social media websites are becoming to be the prime place to network. In the video we saw the teens were so devoted about how many likes or how many comments they get on Facebook profile picture. Getting all this ‘likes’ or all the comment on the post creating a social bravado. New way to be cool is how popular someone’s social media posts are getting. Then we saw the kid play skateboard and eventually getting sponsored and Youtube videos are certainly bumping the popularity up. Then we saw how one Youtube channel gets promoted by another Youtube channel. It is creating a whole different type of world than what it used to be. Now to be famous have to create a youtube channel and create an audience with same type of interest and these users have their own channels.

So what all this means? There is always upside and downside for everything. Upside maybe that we can connect seamlessly anywhere in earth with internet. We can share our ideas, promote creativity, start a career. Downside maybe all the big corporation targeting  the teens and making them seem like there is nothing wrong. When our next generation looks at the mutated social media and how it works, then everybody want to do it. This some statistics I found on Youtube website:

Viewership

• More than 1 billion unique users visit YouTube each month
• Over 6 billion hours of video are watched each month on YouTube—that’s almost an hour for every person on Earth
• 100 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute
• 80% of YouTube traffic comes from outside the US
• YouTube is localized in 61 countries and across 61 languages
• According to Nielsen, YouTube reaches more US adults ages 18-34 than any cable network
• Millions of subscriptions happen each day. The number of people subscribing daily is up more than 3x since last year, and the number of daily subscriptions is up more than 4x since last year

YouTube Partner Program

• Created in 2007, we now have more than a million creators from over 30 countries around the world earning money from their YouTube videos
• Thousands of channels are making six figures a year

Monetization

• Thousands of advertisers are using TrueView in-stream and 75% of our in-stream ads are now skippable
• We have more than a million advertisers using Google ad platforms, the majority of which are small businesses

Mobile and Devices

• Mobile makes up almost 40% of YouTube’s global watch time
• YouTube is available on hundreds of millions of devices

Content ID

• Content ID scans over 400 years of video every day
• More than 5,000 partners use Content ID, including major US network broadcasters, movie studios and record labels
• We have more than 25 million reference files in our Content ID database; it’s among the most comprehensive in the world
• Content ID has generated hundreds of millions of dollars for partners.

If we look at it, we can see how our life and media is changing rapidly. Hopefully it will not self destruct itself making a balance between upside and downside.

I’m well familiar with the “like” and “share” options of different social media tools. However, my understanding of “likes” have always been limited to some amateur stuffs that people do when they roam around on the web. I actually never thought of the fact that likes could worth so much to someone. If we try to identify the winners of the like game, both the like generating people and the companies win. People who are successfully making followers are getting benefited by receiving fame, products, and cash. On the other hand, the companies are building their customer population analyzing the likes that each popular figure generates.

To recognize anyone who’s being exploited I’d say it’s the followers. Many of them are just following the crowd without realizing how their personal information is being monitored, collected, and used.  They of course, only get to follow, which is not any actual benefit that could be utilized for anything. Some people however, are aware of what’s going on. They would still “like” things to feel good or the connection to a specific group.

Oh man.  Wow.  That is one helluva video, to put it lightly.  And while I understand that these cases are of the extreme nature, to me it’s pretty crazy to see this attention-depraved way of thinking put on official display in this Douglas Rushkoff study.  It’s an unfortunate thing, as well, in my opinion.  Because teens shouldn’t have their overall happiness predicated on other people’s view of them, especially when it’s basically just off of aesthetics.  I do believe, though, that this is a natural byproduct of a teenager need-for-acceptance mentality when the most optimal platform in history (modern day smartphones) to utilize in putting oneself ‘out there’ is now owned by almost everyone.  One would hope though that possibly in the future, more exposure to how empty these feelings actually are (caring enough about ‘likes’ to put a paragraph of spam hasthtags under your Instagram picture to ultimately feel bettwr about yourself, for example) would eventually gravitate kids’ values more towards building meaningful relationships and bonding with family members than caring what other people think.  Because there’s a lot of better things to worry about even as a youngster.  Time will tell!

In this situation, the marketers, advertisers, and corporations in general are winning, while the consumers (in this case: teenagers) are the ones losing. Interestingly enough, the marketers have cleverly devised a way to make the consumer feel as if the behavior of “liking” is a self-induced activity, when in actuality, the advertisers are purposely setting everything up for the consumer to behave in this way. The mere connectedness companies have with each other allow for corporations to reach from a convenient inter-web of consumer information. Therefore, consumers become predictable..while companies COULD spend time manufacturing the next big thing, (this is what companies USED to do) companies no longer need to think about what product to make because the consumer is able to pitch their own ideas in. For instance: the new Lays campaign focuses on the idea that anyone can make their own nationally popular flavor. The key thing here is that people vote on each flavor–the one that has the most “like’s” will win a tidy sum of money. Here is my point though, consumers are essentially doing the creators and marketers job….because after someone posts their potato chip flavor, they’ll probably share it to get people to vote on it, and voting on it will bring more people to Lays. So good one lays.

I think Generation Like is an accurate depiction of how most kids and young adults utilize social media outlets. It’s a bit trivial for someone to rely and depend on how many likes or views their posts or videos generate just to validate themselves. It’s understandable that companies would want to reach out to individuals who have generated a high amount of followers, likes, and subscribers, but this eventually transforms the individual’s social media platforms into tools to build the individual’s personal brand as well as the company’s brand. Instead of using it as a source to express themselves or post things they want to show people and not to profit by showing off the goods that the company sponsored them with, it’s more like a marketing/advertising tool for companies. It’s as if the company took over the user’s social media accounts for their own benefit.

Generation Like has shown that it’s pretty much a win-win situation for both the individual and the company that’s sponsoring that individual. In return for showcasing the company’s goods to their social media accounts, they receive free gear, cash or other forms of payment. There’s really no loser unless the individual’s followers decide to unfollow or not like the user’s posts/videos because their product reviews are deceiving. For example, the individual can just be saying nice things about a product to keep getting sponsored, when in actuality that product isn’t great quality. The individual would be losing the audience that they probably took a while to generate. Teens/young adults are being exploited and so are their personal social media platforms. I think they’re aware of their exploitation, but so long as they benefit in some way, they’re probably fine with it.

I’ll be honest—I didn’t really like Generation Like, though I’m still having a little trouble digesting all of the ideas presented. Unlike Digital Nation, which frustrated me to no end, Generation Like hit a little bit closer to home. I am newly 19, so I guess I still qualify as a teen? I can’t figure out if I’m supposed to be one of the troubled kids that Doug Rushkoff and the other experts constantly refer back to.

Personally, I do not consider likes to be a currency. The favorites I get on my tweets do not validate my existence. I do not take social media seriously enough for it to make that much of an impact on my self-worth. That being said, I definitely know people who value and internalize likes. I don’t think social media encourage one type of behavior or another; they just amplify a user’s pre-existing desires. It’s a matter of perception.

Rushkoff talks about teens like he knows what’s best for them, but they deserve a lot more credit than what he’s giving them. I hope he doesn’t think that all teen friend groups sit around the table and help each other develop their social media brands. (That was a little weird, it has to be some sort of social anomaly.) There’s a difference between what those teens were doing—cultivating their personal brands for the sake of likes—and what Tyler Oakley does.

I’m not a fan of Oakley’s work. I’m glad that he’s doing well for himself, but I feel like the Web is over-saturated with his presence and I’m sick of it. Apparently, he knows how  to play the game though. In fact, he’s self-aware enough that he can give corporate presentations. However, when “Ceili Everdeen” spends four to five hours daily promoting The Hunger Games via all her social media platforms, it’s the game that’s playing her. I don’t think it’s about “fame by association,” rather feeling engaged.

Oakley makes actual money because he endorses these brands in his videos in a way that’s transparent but still productive. Ceili earns sparks because she makes GIFS on Tumblr or shares a Facebook post on a friend’s wall. I’m moderately sure that Ceili knows the difference between sparks and money; fangirling is not an occupation. There’s a lot of layers to the issue that Rushkoff presents, but I don’t think he does it justice. Though the economy of likes is thoroughly stratified, he seems to want to treat Oakley, Ceili, and the kids from Jersey gathered around the table meticulously planning out their profiles all the same.

The economic underbelly of the Web has always confused me, and Generation Like only added to that confusion. To balance that with a little more positivity, I do like Rushkoff’s style as a documentarian. He’s very good at smooth transitions and developing an ideological arc.

Generation Like a documentary, explores the concept of “Like” currency. Groups and many individuals that have embraced this new concept in our social media age were highlighted and have exposed the idea behind this phenomenon. As described in the documentary, the concept of “like” is no longer the same. Instead it has become a representation and a currency for what the world thinks of you and what you represent.

I find the idea of likes as currency is quite interesting in the sense that you can do so much more with how much people like you and having it visible to others. It was always apparent to me what likes could do, but what this documentary pointed out about the extent that it can reach surprises me. How something so simple as a like on a photo or a page can trigger a series of events that have a large impact is just surreal. As explained by Rushkoff everything is intertwined. How many likes you have, what you like, who see’s it all and who actually controls this currency are all linked in one way or another. Digital marketing plays a huge part in this. Tyler Oakley is a great example. Tyler has millions of fans on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook etc… What he likes, how many people like him and the brand marketers are all interacting with one another. As explained by the founder of The Audience, when Tyler likes the same thing that another person likes, who also likes him it becomes a double endorsement for the brand. This then is linked to how the brand may reach out and reward in a way, for this interaction. A interaction all based on likes.

I believe that like currency is the key for business like Taco Bell as mentioned in the documentary. This key can clearly separate the winners and losers from all of this- those who have more like than others and receive endorsements by brands are the winners. At the same time, those who reigning in this like currency are being exploited in a way that they not be aware of. Like the girl who started a YouTube page for singing. Even her mother hated to admit that certain moves will generate more like whether you like it or not, it’s not under your control.

Teens nowadays, those who grew up in this culture are fully aware of the implications that a “like” has. They want to be liked, it’s become the social norm. They know what gets people to like them and what doesn’t work. However, I don’t think that they pay much attention to the negative implications. Which can cause outcomes to go either way depending on what they are.

Admittedly, I didn’t realize there was a power behind “likes”, both in the economic and social environment. Upon watching the documentary Generation Like (hosted by Douglas Rushkoff), I gained insight into the power that “likes” have. Simply clicking the like button on Facebook, on YouTube or virtually any site, generates a wide variety of information about yourself that is accessible to people or groups with the right means. The groups who would care about such information would be companies, companies want to know what you like so that they are able to create a profile that they think best describes you for the purposes of advertising the right things to you and making you want to purchase.

Though I believe that there are winners and that they are companies that sell and buy such information, I do not believe that there are losers in this situation – however, I don’t think that it won’t be that way for long. At the moment, we click “like” on websites because we want others to know that we like something so how can we be losers when we consciously know that we are giving up information to be seen by the public? However, we can become losers if companies giving away our “likes” information for profit start to move beyond that and give up more or more private information without us consciously being aware of it.

Above, I spoke about the economic power but the social power of “likes” is nothing to be scoffed at. “Likes” have become something like a scale that measures peoples’ popularity or social standing. Everyone strives to get more “likes” in an attempt to be more popular, to be more liked or to seem superior to others who can’t get as much likes as them. I think that teens are somewhat aware of the power of “likes” but perhaps they don’t see what it does to their views of people. A teenager that has a lot of “likes” is instantly a hit and becomes someone that others look up to. However, a teenager with little or no “likes” would be looked down on. I think that here is definitely a power behind “likes” and that it is still growing and can become something dangerous for the average person in terms of privacy and information.

Watts and Strogatz cited 27 references in their study which were spread across such subjects as math, natural science including ecology  and psychology. They themselves were cited a total of 8,749 times and those citations were mostly concentrated in the fields of physics followed by math and computer. The top 3 authors citing Watts and Strogatz’s work were Cheng GR (1.116 %), Wang BH (1.043 %) and Zhou T (0.999 %).

The areas utilizing the most citations for this work is the field of physics (46.872 %) which is almost half of the total results. The next two largest fields are computer science (14.244 %) followed by math (10.382 %). Over the years and up until 2013 the pattern of citations has shown a continuous upward trend which shows that this study is still highly relevant and useful even today.

Have you ever wondered what happens when you click the Like button on Facebook? Or retweet something you like on Twitter? Or subscribe to your favorite YouTube channel? A couple instances of this mindless act may not have any significant effects. However, with all of instances of you performing these actions; imagine how much information about you is being shared over the internet. Douglas Rushkof in Generation Like explains how this data may be used against us. However, I think this scenario is more harmful than what’s shown on the surface.

Social media users, including myself, benefit from these social platforms. We use it to keep in touch with old friends and family and to meet new friends. However, I believe this benefit is short lived. Some social media platforms claimed that user information, upon request, will remain private. How many people do you know actually knows how to turn on the privacy settings on Facebook, Twitter, or other social medias? Even if the information is hidden from public view, what is stopping from these websites/firms from selling off your information to a third party? The more established firms, like Facebook, may not do this publicly because their reputation is on the line. However, what is stopping a website/company that is on the edge of bankruptcy from doing this?

I believe it is time to revert back to the traditional way of keeping in touch with people; in person. Why not treat your friend to lunch instead of a Facebook message? Or mail your girlfriend a birthday card instead of texting her with emoji smileys? Perhaps bring your coworker a wedding invitation instead of a simple invite over email? With the lowered transaction cost, some actions performed over the internet won’t transcript the same sincerity (or insincerity) as you have hoped for in an in person interaction. Generation Like mentioned that some people require therapy to ease their technology addiction. Despite what the therapy methodologies may be, I believe the most effective solution is human interactions.

Watts and Strogatz in their article “Collective Dynamics of ‘Small-World Networks” has cited 27 other sources. The subjects of the 27 articles cited by them can be characterized as math and sciences. Watts and Strogatz’s article has been cited by 8709 other articles. It is popular amongst the Physics multidisciplinary sciences with a record count of 1622 citations. Along with the physics multidisciplinary sciences would be the computer sciences with 135-303 citations. The articles that cites this article the least are in the environmental and biological sciences category with less than 150 citations. The top three authors that cited the paper were Chen, Gr, Wang, BH and Zhou, T.  The statistics of the pattern of citations predicts that the numbers will only go up as time passes as it already looks that way.

• -# of sources that cited them : 8709
• -top 3 authors that cited the paper :CHEN GR,WANG BH,ZHOU T
• -cites the most : physics and science
• -cites the moderate amt: computer science
• -cites the least: environmental and biological sciences

Watts and Strogatz (1998)

Watts and Strogatz cited 27 sources for their article and their article was cited by others 8,749 times as of today, April 3rd 2014. The top three authors that cited Watts and Strogatz’s article were Chen, Gr. (76 times), Wang, Bh. (71 times), and Zhou T. (68 times). Most of the citations were under physics disciplinary.