We view social media as tools to reach and communicate with people, and through them, we hope that we can become more emotionally connected with others than before. However, a study has contradictorily shown that more time spent on social media was actually associated with more loneliness (Bonsaksen et al., 2023). According to Bekhet et al. (2008), loneliness refers to the subjective, upsetting sense of having a social connection to others that is missing or insufficient, indicating that ties with others are missing or inadequate. Moreover, this paradox persists as the public has widely included social media as a crucial part of their everyday lives (Boulianne, 2015; Chou et al., 2009). However, in this paper, I argue that it is not so much a paradox but rather a manifestation of how social media has changed how we interact with ourselves and others.
To avoid over-generalizing social media as a whole, this paper takes Instagram as the prime subject for the argument. According to Lua (2023), Instagram has so far accumulated over 2 billion monthly active users; therefore, its influence on society as a whole cannot be underestimated because of its large spread of user population. The arguments will revolve around on dissecting the existing Instagram mechanism and how it affects users’ interaction with the world. In contrast, it will also touch a little on users’ psychological inclination caused by constant exposure to the use of social media.
As we know it, Instagram consists of three major components: feeds, stories, and reels. These components have revolutionized the way we interact with the world, as well as communicate with others. All these involve a continuum that relies on users’ incessant scrolling. For example, the presentation of our feeds is the vertical scroll of static images and videos, and the presentation of reels is the vertical scroll of short videos designed to keep us entertained within our attention span. These mechanisms have tremendous effects on us and cannot be taken for granted. Firstly, I would like to establish a stark contrast between reality and the reality manufactured by the technological prowess of Instagram. In reality, everything we see has different degrees of interaction, be it with our friends, family, or even environment. Each encounter contributes to a distinct subjective experience because of the difference in the object of interaction and the environment in which we interact. For example, a dog that we interact with in our home is different from a stray dog we see on the street; the experience we have set both encounters apart as we are exposed to two different kinds of contexts; the first encounter may prompt us to feel loved due to the existing relationship between a pet and the owner, the latter may invoke a feeling of empathy as the dog is being abandoned and neglected. Whatever the examples may be, my point is that the world we live in right now is capable of contributing a genuine experience where we engage all our senses and mental faculties when dealing with a particular situation in the present.
On the contrary, when the situation of both dogs is being translated to one of the feeds on Instagram, the genuine experience of the encounter diminishes as the feeds displayed on Instagram do not provide us with an understanding of the contexts; it is even more so when the feeds’ contents are of a distant past. Though depicted differently on the photographs (or reels), the lack of real-world interaction requires users to deliberately participate and resonate with the contents; it is possible only if it is all there is on the feeds of the user’s platform. However, the very nature of Instagram makes it very difficult to focus on one thing because we will soon be occupied by the following feeds (or reels) we will see. The consistency on the platform, where the richness of life is being reduced to standardized layouts and formats despite differences in contents, makes the interaction less genuine and realistic. Thus, it is logical to boldly assert that our real connection with the world lies in successful evocations of our subjective feelings, and it can only happen when we are exposed to the real world in which we are physically and emotionally involved. Yes, one may counter my argument by saying that our encounters with both the feeds and the real world depend on our visual capacity and they must be more or less the same in terms of the subjective connection between ourselves and what we encounter; however, the density of visual experience on social media is diluted by distance, time, and space, as well as the lack of context. On the contrary, visualization in the real world has all the necessities to appeal to us.
What we encounter on Instagram is no longer a living fact but a representation beyond time and space. This phenomenon resembles what Debord (1967) discussed in his book, The Society of the Spectacle; in societies where modern production conditions prevail, all of life presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into representation. Our constant exposure to representations on Instagram has changed how we interact with people; instead of engaging ourselves with their life, we observe them from afar with no understanding of the contexts whatsoever. When we do not feel with all of our senses and inner experiences and are numbed by the sameness on the social media platform, the lack of understanding and reciprocation rips us of genuine interaction that has been enabling us to connect with the world apart from ourselves. Instead, we feel more alienated than ever because everything is represented in the same manner that does not warrant our empathy for the situation. As Debord (1968) said, the current society, powered by technological advancement, eliminates geographical distance only to produce a new internal separation within us. That is why, as I argued, this is the reason why we are lonelier than ever.
Not only do the standardized expressions on Instagram influence our perceptions of the world, but the infusion of capitalism into its territory has also exposed us to a world of comparison based on possession. When everything can be commodified, and the phenomenon is encouraged by the mechanism of the social media platform, the need for communication has become a means to an end but not an end in itself. According to Freedman (2023), Instagram is a popular social media platform that can serve as a valuable business marketing tool. With features that can push advertisements and track viewers’ engagement, Instagram has now turned from a place of communication to a capitalized market disguised as the former. Aside from our following friends, most information found in our account is advertisements and content aimed at keeping us engaged so that the creators can profit from our engagement. We are constantly bombarded by information that is not at all relevant to our life, and our intention has been distorted because we now use Instagram as a platform for self-aggrandizement and self-promotion.
The first issue arises when Instagram’s content only acts as a market tool for profitization, and our perception of what Instagram initially stands for has significantly skewed and altered. The feeling of loneliness caused by the lack of genuine interaction is exacerbated because we are so trapped in the profit-driven environment that we have forgotten we can use it to connect with other people. However, the platform does not allow us to be aware of its capitalist nature; on the contrary, as Zuboff (2019) has demonstrated, the widespread collection and commodification of personal data by giant corporations have enabled subtle intervention in our behaviours, our behaviours have been engineered in a particular way to stimulate the market, we are either prompt to consume or to being the one who encourages consumerism.
Moreover, the second issue arises when everything we encounter on Instagram is well-branded and curated for the sake of viewers’ engagement. A mirage will inevitably be formed if most people present themselves based on a similar narrative. For example, when ten friends of ours post content that implies a perfect life, we invariably assume that life as we know it must also be perfect and successful; unfortunately, our sense of inferiority blossoms when we reflect upon ourselves and compare our life with them. The capitalist environment of Instagram, where well-curated content has a high possibility of engagement, extends and merges with our behaviours when we navigate through the social media environment. Our focus on genuine communication has been distorted, and we live in a world with more and more information and less and less meaning (Baudrillard, 1983). Baudrillard (1983) further posited that all societies have ended up wearing masks; this is particularly very relatable in the context of Instagram because of the need to display oneself as presentable for the purpose of self-branding in a competitive environment. It has become the norm if one wants to “look” thriving in social media. We feel the need to showcase our life on social media; everything has to happen based on the partial premise that it can be posted online, and when everything can be tweeted, posted, and shared, they have, in a way, become a commodity in the platform of social media, it is even more so when we reinvent ourselves as a brand in public. At that very moment, we become alienated from ourselves because the self through which we connect with the world within and without is now commodified, and its existence no longer depends on genuine evaluation and reflection but on structures of social media.
Due to society’s evolvement, the fact that people rely on social media, in this case, Instagram, to connect with the world is now obsolete. However, I would like to argue that the original intention of connecting with others is genuine and pure in the first place. However, unfortunately, the mechanism through which Instagram operates based on capitalism has outpowered and shadowed the genuine interaction between people. From a standpoint based on humans’ psychological well-being, it is indeed unhealthy because the only place where people think can help them be more emotionally connected is now filled with consumerism and curated content aimed at confusing them. More so, the interaction between two or more human beings is lost when everything is reduced to numbers; for example, when we are validated on the spot by someone, the experience is so real and profound in the sense that it is not always a frequent thing. Many factors accounted for this, such as proximity, timing, contexts, and so on. On the contrary, the mechanism of social media allows everyone that is within the circle to access almost instantly what we have posted, but, incomparable to the “actual” moment of validation, all the validation that we have received on social media is being reduced to numbers of likes, comments, shares, and so on. And especially when the numbers are high, we will no longer feel the same way as we do when someone praises us on the spot; the genuine appreciation of being validated has turned into an appreciation of how many likes we have received. Because of this, we feel lonelier than before since we are not actually “validated”, and we are numbed by the promising “numbers” attached to what we have posted.
Lastly, when what we feel is derived from the mechanism of social media, as seen from the arguments above, it will become challenging for us to interact with everyone else in a genuine, on-the-spot, empathizing manner. However, out of available options and due to the current societal context, we have chosen to remain attached to it to find solace and reciprocation. This only further alienates us because they do not warrant moments and experiences that will ease our need to feel connected. However, most likely, they will only exacerbate the whole situation and make us more in need of feeling connected. In conclusion, based on what I have argued above, we are becoming more isolated and lonelier in this borderless world.