Essay – integrityusd.com

The Role of The Internet to the Society of Spectacle

Nowadays, information has spread widely all over the globe through the internet causing a lot of complexities and problems such as misinformation, propaganda, prejudice, and self-alienation. The spectacle is the one to blame. The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people that is mediated by images (Debord, 1967, p. 67), meaning that it is a dangerous threat to our society since it can strain the social relation. In this essay, the author will describe the internet’s contributions as a tool of government agenda and to collect our personal information for the sake of the spectacle.

First of all, we need to understand the spectacle itself. According to Debord in The Society of The Spectacle (1992), the spectacle is a consensual hallucination amongst people mediated by images in order to blind us from reality by creating a fake one. These images are no ordinary images, but it is rather a social construct that is created to commodify people inside of a society which is already corrupted by the illusion that the spectacle created. This, moreover, would be profiting those who are in charge of creating the spectacle, that is the state, in order to control us. As stated in the previous paragraph, we can conclude that the spectacle creates an illusion of social prejudice, social culture, and how people socialize in general that causes someone to be alienated from others.

The internet is one of the main reasons the spectacle was created since in today’s society information is easily found there. This information, however, is most likely filtered by the government, causing many infiltrations toward the information itself. Bradshaw and Howard in their book stated that “there is at least one political party or government agency using social media to shape public attitudes domestically in each country” (Bradshaw & Howard, 2019, p. i). It is a well-known fact that the information we receive mostly are political agendas, causing people to know little of what has happened. This, in fact, leads to a creation of certain images of an individual toward some events such as race conflicts, wars, elections, and other social-related events. There is little information on the internet which states the truth. Furthermore, people tend to be directed by the controller, or in this case the state, towards the filtered information. Hence the inability to see the truth.

In spite of the flow of information, the internet has also played an important role in data stealing. According to the Office of the Commissioner of Canada, while we surf the internet, our search engines are collected inside one piece of data which makes it easier for those who are able to access it, that is the state, to see our privacy or even our thoughts. This, in fact, would make it easier for the ruling class to transfix the people’s minds in order to control them. This data-collecting system will help the government to lodge in propaganda inside of a society in order to disassociate the people from each other. Certain events of propaganda can be simply shared on the internet. The government, which already knows the users’ data, would classify them into different sub-group, creating easy access for them to provoke and alienate the people from each other. An example is the conflict that happens in West Papua where the Papuans are fighting for their freedom. Ondawame in West Papua: The Discourse of Cultural Genocide and Conflict Resolution (2006) argued that the government is spreading some issues, in this case, throughout the internet toward the audience, depending on which side the audience is taking (Ondawame, 2006, p.35). Racial issues, cultural issues, and the conflict itself are the common three. These issues are most likely already filtered by the government in order to blind the audience from the truth which will create an inability for them to see through the solution, making the people blame each other instead of finding the root problem and finding an appealing solution, and also possibly causing a backlash in the society.

Summing up the matters that have been stated, the author would like to warn people of the danger that the internet might cause by describing its contributions to the spectacle’s society. In the author’s humble opinion, it is best for us to be wise in filtering the information from and on the internet. The author is concerned that the advantages of the internet would cause even more harm to society. Hence, it is important for us to be conscious of the internet and the spectacle. The more a person identifies oneself with the spectacle, the less one will understand what one truly is, which means it is time for people to resurrect themselves in the hope that there will be a better future for the human race.

References:

Debord, G. (1967). The society of the spectacle. Paris: Les Éditions Gallimard

Deleuze, G. (1990). Society of control. Nadir.

Bradshaw, S, & Howard, PN. (2019). The global disinformation order: 2019 global inventory of organised social media manipulation., digitalcommons.unl.edu, https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1209&context=scholcom

Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. (2020). Privacy Education For Kids. https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/about-the-opc/what-we-do/awareness-campaigns-and-events/privacy-education-for-kids/fs-fi/choice-choix/

Ondawame, JO. (2006). West Papua: The discourse of cultural genocide and conflict resolution. Cultural genocide and Asian state peripheries, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230601192_4

Author: Sultan Mahesadewa

Editor: Yohana Satvika Wahyuveda, Ruth Tirza Arina (QC)

Illustrator: Angelita Dayang Diva

Friends vs. Colleagues: An Eye-Opening Lesson of Committing to College Events Committee

In the college events committee dynamic, the blurred line between friends and colleagues can confuse many of us. However, experiencing both relationship types simultaneously may lead us to more meaningful lessons. Let’s take a look at these three common issues in college events’ committees related to friendship and professionality and how we can overcome them.

Issue 1: Should I trust and include them?

This is the question that most often appears in OPREC (Open Recruitment) season. We are in a situation where the department has a limited number of students, and some are inevitably our friends. As a part of the committee, we are expected to judge the candidates objectively. However, as a friend, we might claim to know all the goods they have and all the bad they hide. We may also think it would be easier to work with them since we have built a strong “bond”.

Here are two questions that you need to ask: why do they want to join the committee, and why do you want them on the committee? Finding the answers is not as simple as interviewing with templated questions that we know all too well how to “correctly” answer.

If you want the committee’s future guaranteed, you must spend extra energy beyond the CV, interview, and your current “friendly” knowledge. Take that further step to find more reliable sources who can tell you about their factual footprints, potentials, and risk points. Trust me, and you will need this not for the mere formality of the procedure or to judge them based on their absolute past. Instead, this background information may help you visualize the kind of football you want to play in the team. In other words, what kind of dynamic will exist between the committee members with their tendency to think, feel, react, and behave?

Issue 2: Should I listen to them?

Listening to a friend’s suggestion can be tempting as they are also a part of the department and your circle of “usually trustable” friends. However, the question is how much do they understand about the situation that you are in?

Whether they are a part of the committee or not, you still have to investigate to what extent they know about the big picture of the situation. Do they understand the essential mission of the event, the number of committees, the budget, the timeline, the people, the dynamic in between the committee members, the skill and parameters needed in a particular division, how much time and effort you take to do it, or the actual practice of the work? I bombard you with these considerations to say a very important point: deciding the committee is more challenging than flipping the back of your hand.

Further, you can investigate what they know about things you have yet to learn. They may have the information outside of the committee that can add to the abovementioned considerations. Their perspective, filtered with the status quo of the committee, may assist you (not control you) in making the decision.

What matters most is how you absorb and logically process the information you have gained. Make sure that it is your hope for the event to be successful that takes control, not your desperate need for your friends’ approval. Please understand that not all ideas should be heard, and not all audiences can be pleased. Only take the suggestion which qualifies for the event’s primary goal, the value of the committee members, and the doability of the suggestion. If your brain, heart, and colleagues agree it is strategic, do it. If it is not, leave it.

Now, what if you are in the position of the critics? Let’s move on to issue number 3.

Issue 3: Should I tell them?

Your friend messed up, creating a problem you must fix in the committee, and pisses you off. Telling them will possibly hurt their feelings and break your friendship apart, but keeping it for yourself will bring worse consequences for the committee’s work. Sounds familiar?

You have three choices: tell them, tell the others except them, or do not let them know (ever).

If you choose the latter two, mark my words: you contribute to their damaged future. If they never know what they did wrong, they will never try to mend it either, and congrats! You will be constantly pissed for the rest of your work period. If other people know their mistake except them until the end, congrats! Now your friend will never be accepted in any other committees in the future, and they will never have the chance to grow because of you. So the answer is, tell them, but how?

First thing first, ngaca. If a problem happens, two parties always have their contribution to the mistake, so defeat your ego first and find your part in the issue before facing this friend. Ensure you intend to tell them to improve the situation and not to satisfy your hunger for the illusion of power. Only then, tell your friend mindfully about what they did wrong, what you did wrong, and find a way on how both of you can do better. Communicate how their wrongdoing made you feel and how it will impact other committee members if they keep repeating the behavior.

I understand that you might be scared of their reaction. However, a great leader once taught me this: “if your “friends” continuously deny their mistakes and refuse to change just for the sake of unreasonable ego or fear, you will have to question yourself: are they really good friends of yours when they do not bother to respect you?”

Author: Agnes Seraphine

Editor: Sitti Aminah Intan Utami, Vonna Meisya Saputra (QC)

Illustrator: Betsy Mariana Agoha