The Thing with Online Social Networks

Ask any person aged 16 to 35 (who has access to the internet) if they are members of any of the online social networks, i.e., Friendster, Multiply, Facebook and the like, and I'm willing to to bet my bottom peso that they most probably are. The fact that the recent decade has seen a phenomenal increase in the membership of these online social networks is a testament to the very basic need of people to socialize, and to a more base extent, to project oneself as someone they aren't. Don't get me wrong, however. Online social networks do have their advantages--for one, they actually help people touch base with old friends, and they could serve as a cool alternative to emails in terms to messaging. But that's about it.

More often than not, the network of friends or contacts of people in online social networks are composed mainly of friends of friends, or people they've only met once, and who they deem worthy to call their friends. In fact, some people even invite complete strangers to be their friends or contacts--something that defeats the purpose of having online social networks as a means of updating oneself on the goings-on of friends or contacts. In effect, these online social networks are merely popularity contests--a race to see who has the most friends or contacts, and who has the most comments or testimonials left by friends and contacts. Not only are they pseudo-popularity contests, but also, these online social networks are a PR tool--an effective way of putting one's best foot forward, even though most of the time, the best foot may actually just be what one aspires to be. Indeed, if you carefully read the "About Me" pages of Friendster and Facebook or Multiply, you would be surprised at the fact that most of your friends would have probably read Plato's "The Republic" or the Bible, or even Leo Tolstoy's "War and Peace" or "Anna Karenina"! Wow. And you thought that the book "Ibong Adarna", which you read in High School but deemed fit to put in your "About Me-Books Read" Profile was gonna impress. And what's funny is, you never knew that you had such scholarly friends, or that in fact, your friends, at the very least, actually read.

What's also creepy is the fact that I know more of my online friends (meta-friends) than I do most of my real-world friends. And I'm sure most of my online friends know more about me than I do myself. Obviously, they know that I like drinking myself to death, given the fact that I'm always on the receiving end of a barrage of all types of drinks in Facebook. They also know that I'm most likey to corrupt the minds of young people, or most likely to get rich or die trying. My online friends also know that I liked to be poked a lot, or being cock-blocked, or being high-fived, etc. How very presumptuous! In the first place, only my real-world friends who are also my online friends have the right to poke or send me drinks since they probably know me well enough to figure out what my likes and dislikes are. All others should get to know me first. While online social networks can be fun to use, sometimes, the annoyance that I get from friends and contacts who are "feeling" gets to me real good.