SCOT and Lillievehymo

I have really never subscribed to the idea of technological determinism. I get very frustrated with the idea that people think that technology makes their lives worse, or that they would be better off without it.  For that reason, the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT), as described by Nancy Baym, is a theoretical perspective that is much easier to agree with.

SCOT focuses on how technologies arise from social processes. Unlike technological determinism, which states that technologies create themselves, SCOT dictates that technologies are created to fill a need, and that there are a wide range of social, economic and cultural factors that influence the way people use media.  This means, that technologies are created by someone who is able to imagine a technology fulfilling a need.  With this in mind, I believe that Instagram was created to cater to our obsession with celebrity.

I watched a film last year called Teenage Paparazzo, which is a documentary that focuses on society’s obsession with celebrity.  In it, there was a statistic mentioned that may be surprising, but is also not unbelievable. In a survey of approximately 700 middle school students asked to select their “dream job” from an impressive list including a CEO of a fortune 500 company, US Senator, President of Harvard or Yale, etc; 42% of participants indicated that their dream job would be an assistant to a celebrity.  This statistic is twice as much as a President of Harvard or Yale, three times as much as US Senator and four times as much as a CEO.

Instagram and other social media enable us to interact with celebrities by liking their personal posts, but it also goes one step beyond - enabling its users to develop as micro-celebrities. 

Before Instagram, to feel like they were interacting with celebrities, people would buy tabloid magazines to keep up to date with their lives, interests and fashion choices. Now, since Instagram caters to our celebrity obsession, it can replace tabloids and go one step further by giving us a platform to mimic celebrities and be recognized. I think Lilli Heymowitz would likely look and act the same whether or not she has Instagram, but since she does, she is putting herself on display for others to “consume.” 

Her appearance and lifestyle are similar enough to a celebrity’s to be desirable, but because she’s a regular girl, she is accessible to the thousands of New York teens who want nothing more than to encounter someone famous.  The more recognition she gets, the more famous she becomes, etc.

Instagram enabled her to achieve micro-celebrity status, a dream she likely would have held even without Instagram.  She does not really take any extra steps to become “famous,” other than by interacting with the platform in the same way thousands of other users do every day. Everyone has Instagram, so that is not what makes her stand out to the masses. Instead it’s her content - her belongings and appearance- that she would have owned either way. Instagram did not change her, it simply made her more accessible.

I think it is noteworthy that she deleted all but 10 of her photos, as it indicates that Instagram has made her famous, but it has not changed the value she places on privacy.  

I DM'd her to ask why she did it but she never got back to me.. Guess she's too cool