What makes the Internet so fortuitous and influential is its ability to expose us to different perspectives that we wouldn't consider if we hadn't been exposed to it. In short, the Internet is an anomaly that we are seeking to understand daily. While exposing ourselves to different viewpoints, we're giving ourselves a sense of purpose and we can either be supportive of what we see or we can oppose it. This becomes challenging when technicalities override our online experience. This is highlighted in Eli Pariser's webinar entitled, 'Beware of Online Filter Bubbles' where he questions the amount of control the internet has over the information we consume and how we consume it.

Pariser recounts being on Facebook where he spent much of his time connecting with people. As a self-proclaimed Progressive, Pariser sought to exercise his political prowess by engaging in discussions with Conservatives. Interestingly enough, he hadn't engaged with Conservatives to provoke confrontation but rather, to understand the opposing view. To Pariser's surprise, the Conservatives' accounts were no longer visible on his Facebook. Pariser soon came to realize that because of his affiliation with the Progressive movement primarily, Facebook filtered out the Conservatives. Pariser found this incredibly problematic in that he couldn't control the actions of his profile. Essentially, his interactions with Conservative's served a purpose, a purpose that Facebook's automated filtering system could not understand. 

Socialization plays a major role in who we are as humans. Through meeting new people and exploring different perspectives, we conceive new ideas. When we are limited as to who we can interact with we're often limited to one perspective. 

Clive Thompson, a Canadian freelance blogger and journalist, believes otherwise challenging the validity of meeting new people constantly and building relationships. Thompson doesn't take a particular side but feels as though we cannot attribute the information we consume today to unfamiliar people. Admittedly, we're social creatures that enjoy meeting new people that share different opinions than us. We don't expect everyone to be similar and that is the power of social networking. However, Thompson counters this notion with the idea of homophily. Homophily is the ability between individuals to connect more with people who share similar interests. Contextually speaking, the impact of homophilic relationships is amplified through frequency of contact. Research shows a correlative relationship in the frequency in which we contact friends and family and they're ability to capture our attention.

We all socialize in one or another. There is no right or wrong way to approach this idea. While some of us may feel compelled to meet new people and build relationships, there are others who prefer to build on relationships they've already created. Information isn't bound to any particular group of people. As our interests grow, we develop an increased sense of who we are. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, we are in the midst of a cultural revolution. The age of the Social Network is among the most momentous paradigm shifts that we've ever seen and it's quite astonishing that it is still in its infancy. Although the Internet has been around for over two decades, it wasn't nearly as prevalent then as it is now. Today, we're bearing witness to the vitality of Social Network due to its ubiquitous nature. We see it being implemented into politics, entertainment, sports, as well as businesses, both big and small. Needless to say, it has taken a life of its own. What impresses me most about Social Networking is its malleability which is exemplified in President Obama's use in his run for office back in 2008. Prior to President Obama, most politicians sought to appeal to the social media realm by raising money for their campaigns. Others, such as former President George W. Bush, resorted to more conservative ways of reaching voters. This included the use of phone banks, voter lists, and direct mail. Bush believed that switching to a more technologically-based method would be costly. However, President Obama thought differently. He saw social networking as something more. He saw social networking as an entity that could be built on relationships, reliability, efficiency, accuracy, precision, and innovation. Often times, we as constituents feel disengaged from the politicians representing us. As a result, we second-guess the importance in our vote. Obama's tactics in reaching out to his supporters and building a database essentially highlighted his willingness to make his communication with his supporters much more interpersonal. This made sense. People have a better chance in feeling that they are involved in the decision-making of who's elected if they are somehow included in the conversation. This notion helped Obama tremendously because it had never been done before. This is the same forward-thinking we desired as a nation especially after having suffered the worst recession since the Great Depression. Obama understands that our world is highly mobilized. Therefore, he sought to adapt to the changes in culture and use them to his benefit, for our benefit. Not once did he do this, but twice, as he ran for re-election in 2012 and was re-elected.

The impact of Social Networking can never be measured. We often highlight the adverse effects of social networking by addressing the threats it presents. We constantly hear about sexual predators, cyberbullies, and hackers but fail to establish a more positive outlook on the Internet. Social Networking is an important tool for social change. It cannot be limited to only one form of use. While we use it mostly to socialize it can be used as a tool to unify. A unifying tool that promotes solidarity and promotes goodwill. Obama sought to explore this idea further during his run for Presidency. By allowing himself to adapt to the changes in culture, he was able to make himself much more relevant and even more viable candidate for office. This is lacking in the political arena as we feel very disconnected from politicians. Is this why Donald Trump can't stay off of Twitter?

You're never quite aware of how many people there are like you in the world who share your thoughts, perceptions, your interests, and values until you've witnessed the revolutionary entity that is the Internet. Although I'd like to believe that the Internet has not played a significant role in who I am today, I'd have to fall back on this inaccurate predication.

As a child, my 'play days' were very eventful, to say the least. Summers were always enjoyable because most of my family lived in close proximity so it almost felt like everyday would be spent having a barbecue. We'd then invite countless guests from our church because we were extremely tight-knit with them as well. When we weren't having backyard barbecues for no reason we would travel in droves to Dorney Park and Heckscher State Park for recreation. This was home to me. This was where I knew I could be myself. I didn't have to exert much of my energy in being someone else because the family and friends surrounding me knew who I was as we were very closely linked. Needless to say, interactions were much more primal and direct with children and parents alike. It required no medium to facilitate exchanges. As a kid, I gained a sense of comfort in that and wished that it would go on perpetually. But, as we all know, change is inevitable. As years passed, I started to see that the church gatherings I thoroughly enjoyed, dwindled as many members began to depart. Much of my family proceeded to disperse along the east coast, some voyaging south to Georgia and others to Florida. The dynamic, since then, had shifted entirely.

So, where's the chase and how do I cut to it?

For me, being in middle-school, used to feel like a world literally away from home. The only way to survive in that world was to adapt. As social creatures, we all long to be accepted in whatever way we can. Because I did not have an identity that was prevalent in school, I sought to create one to give peers the impression that I was someone more than who I appeared to be. Growing up I became increasingly cognizant of the image I portrayed and wanted to feel comfortable in my own skin the same way I had felt with my family and friends prior to adolescence. Watching the PBS presentation, "Growing Up Online", I can identify with what many of the students are saying because I had gone through similar experiences that involved being bullied, feeling left out and unwanted. The change was sudden. The Internet seemed quick, easy, and readily accessible. It didn't involve any confrontation. It appeared as the perfect avenue to promote a greater sense of self. Even today, I see that the most primary use of social media is to understand who we are as individuals and constitute a figment of the person we wish to be. However, the purpose of the Internet is rather obscure as we seem to have contrasting approaches in how we personalize our worlds. Paradoxically, while personalizing it we're publicizing it. The question is, is this conducive to our sense of self or counterproductive?

It's worth noting that the Internet does have a tendency to amplify emotions which is partly due to the validity we give it. Because most social networking sites employ the use of 'likes' and 'friends', many people, most notably young teens, overcompensate for what they lack because they aren't where they would like to be numerically. This gives social media a competitive edge that may often result in more extreme cases of self-exposure which include, but are not limited to, mild nudity and suggestive images that they wouldn't post otherwise. This means more exposure to cyberbullies and sexual predators which, is still an ongoing issue. When infused with low self-esteem, it is relatively easy to resort to self-destructive antics such as mutilation and in more extreme circumstances, death as we see with John Halligan's son, Mike who, sadly, committed suicide after being called "gay". Social networking increases vulnerability. To add on, words can easily be misconstrued which may heighten confrontations that are often preventable.

Nonetheless, we can all agree that the Internet is a powerful tool that has the profound ability to sway the livelihoods of younger generations. However, to what extent must we hold ourselves accountable so that it does not adversely affect the generations ahead?