Durkheim and the Social Media Q.1

Durkheimand the Social Media

Q.1

SocialMedia Influence on Social Cohesion

About 70% of the respondent in the contemporary society concurthat social media creates a basis for new forms of social cohesion,while 16% strongly object. A large population believes that thesocial media can build a strong national community. Below is a clearexplanation of how social media creates social cohesion.

Social media such as Facebook and YouTube may enhance other-orientedinterest in the participants who use them. Thousands of followers canbe attracted to a Facebook page with current information in a shorttime. For example, the organized way of San Francisco or Chicago.Social media has created an increase in the level of willingness toget engaged in community activities such as fundraising. Inconclusion, we can affirm that Facebook and YouTube are alternativessolution to the face to face relationships that Durkheim advocated(Faine et al., 2016).

Second, people engage in presidential and campaigns elections throughthe social media. This will aid in the act of making onlinecontributions. These efforts have been a success since 2006 andsuggest that online communities have recovered the lost pervasivenessby the fragmented television audience (Faine et al., 2016).The act of aggregating large numbers of citizens online proves thatthe social media can build a broader consensus among citizens.

The social media also has a negative perspective. News from thesocial media is fragmented thereby reducing the interactions amongcitizens. The larger population is fragmented to small socialcommunities by the social media. This shows that the social mediafails to develop the attitude of binding the American society.Viewing the population as whole, this may seem like a workforceagainst social cohesion (Faine et al., 2016).

In conclusion, the social media is inclined to directions,agglomeration, and fragmentation. Small group cohesions are madefavorable by social media whereas national cohesion is undermined.The final result may be more inclined to the positive direction.

Q.2

DurkheimView about the Social Media

Emile Durkheim had a key interest in social solidarity and how peopleinteract in the society. Individuals in the 21st century communicatethrough the social media. Almost every individual has a Twitter orFacebook account. People share experiences through the social mediaplatform. However, people do not interact face to face in thisgeneration. This is not the thought Durkheim had in his mind. Headvocated for social solidarity (Faine et al., 2016). Thesocial integration in a community is based on a shared moral code.The moral code in the social media is questionable.

Some individuals share negative information through the social media,for instance, plans to kill or hurt someone. Is this the moral codethat Durkheim advocated for? According to Emile Durkheim, this is anexample of anomie, instability due to the breakdown of standards, andindividual unrest he would state anomie as “a rule the lack ofrule.” Also, Durkheim would say that a community excused of crimeis almost impossible because it is based on the collective sentimentsupon which it is founded (Faine et al., 2016).

The today’s society is full of fear, and we do not know what mayhappen. The son of a policeman in an elementary station just walks inwith a gun and kills 36 people?! A 21-year-old lady kills in LosAngeles? Such stories are heard now and then in the social media.There must be something wrong with the society. Durkheim advocatedthat the society influenced the individuals to listen to the news(Faine et al., 2016). We can all affirm in one accord that thesociety is not well. Durkheim would be interested in researching whatmotivates the people to carry out such actions he would focus on thesocial facts about the matter.

In conclusion, from the context, a few things are revealed aboutDurkheim’s ideas on how societies interact. In the 21st century,people interact via the social media, for example, Facebook, Twitter,or Instagram. The social media interaction crops up a negativeeffect. The social norms of the society are broken through bad stuffin the social media which at times lead to crime. This would bereferred to as “anomie” by Durkheim. Also, he would be researchon the social facts to why people do such actions (Faine et al.,2016).

Q.3

Symbols,Rituals, and Methods of Cohesiveness

The Sociological theory portrays that rituals show some latentfunctions, specifically, endorsement of the social cohesion. This isexplained by Emile Durkheim concept of rituals. Rituals are based onestablishing moral guidelines, shared beliefs, and religiouspractices. Religious activities are important in establishing a moralorder in the society. Assembled groups that harness people create acollective effervescence (Faine et al., 2016).

Symbols are visible manifestations of indicators of organizationallife (Faine et al., 2016). The organizational membersexperience them. The physical layout of the society is a criticalsymbol. The impression gives a warm welcome to the corporate culture.Symbols bring cohesiveness through the reflection of theorganizational culture, propel culture values and norms, provide amodel for sharing experience, and act help to integrate theorganizational meaning.

Q.4

IsCollective Effervescence Feed by the Social Media?

Emile Durkheim’s theory of religion is rooted on collectiveeffervescence. He argues that occasions in which the society gatherstogether are sacred (Faine et al., .2016). From the aboveconcrete discussion, we can affirm that the social media does notoffer the collective effervescence. The social media does not alignwith Durkheim’s ideas about the social interaction and cohesion.

Reference

Faine, M., Plowright, S., &amp Seddon, T. (2016). Higher Educationand Social Cohesion: Universities, Citizenship, and Spaces ofOrientation. In Creating Social Cohesion in an InterdependentWorld (pp. 205-219). Palgrave Macmillan US.