What We Choose to See





While scrolling through the graphics created by Pawel Kuczynski the two above stood out amongst the rest. Their direct correlation to what society chooses to see can be directly related to the influence of social media, as clearly seen in the first graphic.

No matter the open door, the man chooses to look to social media, Facebook in this case, to know what is happening on the other side. From the man's perspective, this is the most efficient and reliable way to know what is happening on the other side of the restrictive metal door. However, in reality it is just one option; the door is clearly open for those willing to pass through it.

Following this thought, I came across the second graphic and found a direct connection. The similar blue color of the paint to the Facebook sign may have been the initial attention grabber, but the people who chose to stand and stare at the outcome of the accident more that the dying man relates to out dependency of social media. The paint spill is much larger than the blood shed, but that leads to the importance of each. Shouldn't a drop of blood cause more reaction than a puddle of paint?

Thinking back and relating this to the Boston Bombings, the media blew the whole event into a proportion much larger than what it actually was. The injuries and negative outcomes should bring forth some attention and the attack perhaps more attention than the bloodshed, but what about the bombs that killed hundreds of people in the Middle East that day? How much publicity did it get in comparison to the bombings?

Of course one can argue scale/relation and defend either side of the argument, but the fact is that social media simply had a larger affect when sharing what happened in Boston than the Middle East. That leaves me to question what else are we missing out on due to social media's narrow view?