Social networks

Young people have a very close relationship with social networks, having acquired them as a fact in their communication and social interaction horizon. The risks, however, are well present to the point that it is possible to create a real parallel reality from which it is no longer possible to escape, losing sight of two essential components of our life: human face-to-face interaction and the relationship with boredom. Some kids have even chosen not to use them, going against the grain. There are many positive uses that can be made of it, but violent behaviors have also been born among young people, as in the case of cyber bullying. Countering similar phenomena (since violence occurs on the web and remains suspended in the ether) becomes increasingly difficult. The frailty of adolescents is also a great resource for social networks: at a time when the opinions and the character of children are being formed, the risk of homologation is very strong, so much so that there has been talk of a real “pillory media ”, when for an article, a comment, a photo deemed inappropriate, one is targeted by the jabs of others. In very fragile characters this behavior can have serious consequences. Then there is another fact, not to be overlooked: the latest generations do not know a world before social networks and therefore could hardly imagine it without. Facebook and Twitter, Instagram and MySpace, Tumblr and LinkedIn, Netlog and Foursquare as well as all other “social networking services” share a feature that would once have been considered revolutionary: they are made by users. That is, the basic idea that has ensured its success before any other evolution lies in the fact that social networks lack the “broadcast”, that is the center for the diffusion of messages from “one to many” which is characterized by the presence of a “cultural mediator”, a person in charge of the information disseminated: in simple terms, lacking the figure of the responsible director who gives order and cuts to be given to news to be disseminated to as many people as possible, there is a communication from “many to many” , in which there are as many receptors as there are speakers,