Monday, September 4, 2017

Social Media, Loneliness, and Anxiety in Young People (from Psychology Today)


Social Media, Loneliness, and Anxiety in Young People
Is there a role for social media in perpetuating anxiety and loneliness?
Posted Dec 15, 2016

Is there a role for social media in perpetuating anxiety through feelings of disconnection and loneliness? At first glance, social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter seem to be a modern means of facilitating our connectedness with others, sharing activities and news, and keeping in touch with friends both old and new. But new technologies are usually a mixture of both good and bad, and modern social media are no different.
First, loneliness appears to have a reciprocal relationship with social anxiety. Social anxiety is an anxiety problem where a person has an excessive and unreasonable fear of social situations. Social anxiety is known to facilitate loneliness; but loneliness also increases social anxiety and feelings of paranoia, and this may represent a cyclical process that is especially active in the young and in our modern times may be mediated by the use of social media[1].
So how might social media be involved? Loneliness in the young is largely a function of perceived friendship networks. Effectively, feelings of loneliness increase the fewer friends that an individual has. In the modern day, social media such as Facebook and Twitter are a significant contributor to the friendship networks of young people, so whether you perceive yourself to be a successful user of social media is likely to have an impact on feelings of loneliness, anxiety, paranoia, and mental health generally.
The relatively modern phenomenon of social media and its associated technology adds a new dimension to loneliness and anxiety by offering the young person a way of directly quantifying friendships, viewing the friendship networks of others for comparison, and providing immediate information about social events. You can compare your own popularity with that of your peers, and manage that adolescent ‘fear of missing out’ (FOMO) by continually monitoring what’s going on socially. So it’s easy to see how technology use can take the place of more traditional social interaction and provide a yardstick for one’s popularity – or more significantly, one’s feelings of loneliness and alienation.
There’s no shortage of evidence that loneliness, social anxiety and social isolation can cause excessive use of social networking sites in young people. For example, a study of university students in the UK found that real life social interaction was negatively associated with excessive use of Twitter, and loneliness was a significant factor that mediated this relationship[2], so it’s clear that many people use social networking sites in general to relieve themselves of their loneliness.
Social anxiety and the need for social assurance are also associated with problematic use of Facebook to the point where Facebook use can become an addiction[3], and has even been shown to activate the same brain areas as addictive drugs such as cocaine[4]! This addiction poses a threat to physical and psychological well-being and interferes with performance at school or work, and staying away from Facebook is viewed by users as an act of ‘self-sacrifice’ or a ‘detoxification’. So the vicious cycle is that loneliness and social anxiety generate use of social networking sites, but then problematic addiction to these sites itself causes further forms of anxiety and stress.
For instance, a study of 1,839 college students by Reynol Junco at Lock Haven University in the US found that time spent on Facebook was strongly and significantly negatively related to overall grade point average (GPA), but it was only time spent socializing on Facebook that had this negative relationship with school performance[5]. Using Facebook for collecting and sharing information was positively predictive of GPA – suggesting that, like most technologies, Facebook use can have some good as well as negative impacts. This study provides no real insight into the direction of cause here: Do lower grades lead to more Facebook use or does more Facebook use lead to lower grades (or does something else influence both at the same time)? However, if Facebook use is a genuine addiction that the user cannot easily control, it takes little imagination to see that Facebook use when it has become uncontrollable may be detrimental to academic performance.
Secondly, a study of college student Facebook use by Jay Campisi and colleagues at Regis University in Colorado found that almost all respondents experienced some form of Facebook-induced stress and that this stress was directly associated with physical health problems such as upper respiratory infections[6]. But what was interesting was that this stress wasn’t a function of how small a respondent's social network was, but how large it was – the larger the Facebook network, the greater the stress – so a large network of friends on social networking sites may also be an added source of stress to today’s young people.
The added stress and anxiety that large cyber social networks bring has been well illustrated in a study by Julie Morin-Major and colleagues at Harvard[7]. They found that after controlling for other relevant factors such as sex, age, time of awakening, perceived stress and perceived social support, the larger your Facebook network, the greater your diurnal cortisol production. Higher awakening cortisol levels are associated with chronic stress and worry, burnout, and are a vulnerability factor for depression. The authors of this study speculated that the number of Facebook friends you have might be positive up to a point, and offer social reassurance and social support, but after this optimum level is passed, this may switch social support into social pressure and lead to increased stress and higher cortisol levels.
We’ve already seen that use of social media can affect physical health and college or work performance, but just as with any other forms of addiction, fear of not being able to use or access social networking sites causes added distress – in this case caused by feelings of social exclusion that would result from being unable to access these sites[8]. This is a significant sign of addiction – for many of us, our social media is often the first thing we check in the morning and the last thing we check before going to sleep! Social media such as Facebook and Twitter provide constant updates which can turn a mere interest in social networks into an unhealthy, stressful compulsion that not only affects stress levels, but leads to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem. As empowering as our modern culture is, it’s also dangerous. Young people can talk readily about their addiction to social media, but how candidly can they talk about the anxieties that it generates?
A study of social isolation in America by Miller McPherson and colleagues found that between 1984 and 2005, the mean number of confidants a person had decreased from 2.94 to 2.08 – a significant drop in what we would call “real friends”[9]. This is important, because as the sociologist Eric Klinenberg pointed out, it’s the quality of your social interactions, not the quantity, that defines loneliness[10]. This is something that older people are aware of, and life seems to have taught them that a few quality friends are more important than the quantity of connections in your friendship network.
Yet although connectedness has fallen significantly over the past 40-50 years, we still have the compelling evolutionary need to connect with other human beings. As John Cacioppo has pointed out “forming connections with pets, or online friends, or even with God, is a noble attempt by an obligatory gregarious creature to satisfy a compelling need,” and this continuing need in the face of creeping social isolation has coincided with the internet providing us with an “army of replacement confidants” – none of whom are confidants in the original meaning of the term.
In this sense, social media such as Facebook have become surrogates for seeking connectedness, and as a consequence our connections grow broader but shallower.[11] But our use of social media to chase connectedness may merely make us feel more disconnected and lonelier. For example, feelings of disconnectedness are associated with passive interactions with Facebook, such as using it only to update your own activities or merely scanning the activities of friends. If you log on to Facebook every day like more than half of all Facebook users in the world do, and you use it in this passive way, it will merely reinforce your feelings of disconnectedness.
What comes out of these findings about the use of social networking sites is that loneliness and social anxiety do indeed appear to facilitate use of these sites – often to the point of an addiction, when there is an unhealthy desire to spend hours each day checking these sites. However, even with a good sized social network on sites such as Facebook and Twitter, there come added stressors and feelings of disconnectedness, anxieties that can cause physical health problems and negatively affect academic performance in the young. It’s fair to say that use of social media by young people is not just a consequence of their social anxieties, but causes additional anxieties and stresses that are all grist for the modern-day anxiety epidemic.
References
[1] Lim M H, Rodebaugh T L, Zyphur M J & Gleeson J F M (2016) Loneliness over time: The crucial role of social anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125, 620-630.
[2] Ndasauka Y, Hou J, Wang Y, Yang L et al. (2016) Excessive use of Twitter among college students in the UK: Validation of the Microblog Excessive Use Scale and relationship to social interaction and loneliness. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 963-971.
[3] Lee-Won R J, Herzog L & Gwan Park S (2015) Hooked on Facebook: The role of social anxiety and need for social assurance in problematic use of Facebook. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw., 18, 567-574.
[4] Turel O, He Q, Xue G & Bechara A (2014) Examination of neural systems sub-serving Facebook “addiction”. Psychological Reports: Disability & Trauma, 115, 675-695.
[5] Junco R (2011) Too much face and not enough books: the relationship between multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior
[6] Campisi J, Bynog P, McGehee H, Oakland J C et al. (2012) Facebook, stress, and incidence of upper respiratory infection in undergraduate college students. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw., 15, 675-681.
[7] Morin-Major J K, Marin M-F, Durand N, Wan N et al. (2016) Facebook behaviors associated with diurnal cortisol in adolescents: Is befriending stressful? Psychoneuroendocrinology, 63, 238-246.
[8] Chiou W-B, Lee C-C & Liao D-C (2015) Facebook effects on social distress: Priming with online social networking thoughts can alter the perceived distress due to social exclusion. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 230-236.
[9] McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L & Brashears M E (2006) Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades. American Sociological Review, 7, 353-375.
[10] Klinenberg E (2013) Going solo: The extraordinary rise and surprising appeal of living alone. Penguin Books.
[11] Marche S (2012) Is Facebook making us lonely? http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/05/is-facebook-making-us-lonely/308930/


The Real Campus Scourge (from The New York Times):

The Real Campus Scourge
Frank Bruni SEPT. 2, 2017 (From The New York Times)

Across the country, college freshmen are settling into their new lives and grappling with something that doesn’t compete with protests and political correctness for the media’s attention, something that no one prepared them for, something that has nothing to do with being “snowflakes” and everything to do with being human.
They’re lonely.
In a sea of people, they find themselves adrift. The technology that keeps them connected to parents and high school friends only reminds them of their physical separation from just about everyone they know best. That estrangement can be a gateway to binge drinking and other self-destructive behavior. And it’s as likely to derail their ambitions as almost anything else.
Brett Epstein felt it. “I spent my first night in the dorm and it hit me like a pile of bricks: It’s just me here,” Epstein, a 21-year-old senior at the College of Charleston, told me about his start there three years ago. “I was completely freaked out.”
Clara Nguyen felt it, too. “It’s a lot more difficult to make friends than people make it out to be,” Nguyen, a 19-year-old sophomore at U.C.L.A., told me about her experience last year. “I didn’t know how to be someone new while at the same time being who I always was.”
The problem sounds so ordinary, so obvious: People in an unfamiliar location confront dislocation. On their own two legs for the first time, they’re wobbly. Who would expect otherwise?

Well, most of them did, because college isn’t sold to teenagers as just any place or passage. It’s a gaudily painted promise. The time of their lives! The disparity between myth and reality stuns many of them, and various facets of youth today — from social media to a secondary-school narrative that frames admission to college as the end of all worry — worsen the impact.
Harry Rockland-Miller, who just retired as the director for the Center for Counseling and Psychological Health at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, told me the emblematic story of a freshman he treated:
“He was 18. He came to school and was invited to a party his first weekend, and he didn’t know anybody. So he started to drink. He drank way too much and ended up lying on a bench in his residential hall, feeling very sick. Nobody stopped and said, ‘How are you doing? Are you O.K.?’ And he felt so isolated. When he came in to speak with me the next day, the thing that struck him — what he said — was, ‘There I was, alone, with all these people around.’ ”
Alone, with all these people around. In a survey of nearly 28,000 students on 51 campuses by the American College Health Association last year, more than 60 percent said that they had “felt very lonely” in the previous 12 months. Nearly 30 percent said that they had felt that way in the previous two weeks.
Victor Schwartz, the medical director of the Jed Foundation, which is one of the nation’s leading advocacy groups for the mental health of teenagers and young adults, said that those findings were consistent with his own observation of college students today. “While they expected that academics and finances would be sources of stress,” he told me, “many students were lonely and thought this was sort of unique to them, because no one talked about it.”
Their peers in fact do something that mine couldn’t back in the 1980s, when I attended college: use Facebook and Instagram to perform pantomimes of uninterrupted fun and unalloyed fabulousness. And these “highly curated selves,” as the U.C.L.A. psychologist Elizabeth Gong-Guy called them, “amplify the fact that you’re sitting in your residence hall alone.”
Gong-Guy runs her university’s Campus and Student Resilience program, which helps students with emotional struggles and exemplifies many schools’ intensifying efforts to address loneliness, among other mental health issues.
Extended, elaborate freshmen orientation schedules are another intended prophylactic against loneliness, which is a common reason for dropping out. And as Lawrence Biemiller recently noted in an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, there’s even a push to place and design freshmen dormitories so that solitary time is minimized and interaction maximized.
Three new residence halls at Goucher College, one of which opened last fall and two of which are nearing completion, typify this trend. Goucher’s president, José Antonio Bowen, said that the center-of-hall situation of bathrooms, the glass walls of laundry rooms and even the speed of the wireless connection in common areas — much faster than in the rooms — are deliberate pushbacks against forces that can isolate students.
“Students are arriving on college campuses with all of their high school friends on their phones,” Bowen told me, referring to the technological quirks of today. They too easily substitute virtual interactions for physical ones, withdrawing from their immediate circumstances and winding up lonely as a result.
That’s why the solution isn’t hourly messages from concerned moms and dads, whose stubborn attentiveness, no matter how well meant, can leave their children psychologically frail. Mental health experts and college administrators recommend a more thoughtful organization of campus life and more candid conversations about the tricky transition to college.
Nguyen, the U.C.L.A. sophomore, said that in her Vietnamese-American family in Southern California, all the talk was of doing well enough in high school to get to college and not about the challenges college itself might present. Epstein, the College of Charleston senior, said that his popularity in high school in the suburbs of New York City perhaps distracted him from any awareness that “I was going 700 miles away and being dropped in a place of 10,000 people and wasn’t going to know anybody.” What followed, he added, was “a long battle with anxiety and depression.”

One of the narrators of Tom Perrotta’s superb new novel, “Mrs. Fletcher,” is a former high school lacrosse star who arrives on campus “after all the endless buildup” and develops a “queasy feeling” that his world has become at once more populous and a whole lot colder. “There I was, people-watching and eating my omelet,” he says of one morning in the dining hall, “and the next thing I knew my throat swelled up. And then my eyes started to water.”

We urge new college students not to party too hard. We warn them of weight gain (“the freshman 15”). We also need to tell them that what’s often behind all that drinking and eating isn’t celebration but sadness, which is normal, survivable and shared by many of the people around them, no matter how sunny their faces or their Facebook posts.

Thursday, August 31, 2017

Summer Box Office Bombs

Summer Box Office Suffers Historic Decline in U.S.

by Pamela McClintock
From left: 'The Mummy,' 'Transformers: The Last Knight,' 'The Dark Tower'From left to right: Courtesy of Universal Pictures, Paramount Pictures and Sony Pictures
By the time Labor Day weekend wraps, summer box-office revenue in North America will end up being down nearly 16 percent over last year, the steepest decline in modern times and eclipsing the 14.6 percent dip in 2014. It will also be the first time since 2006 that summer didn't clear $4 billion.
That's according to comScore, which is predicting that revenue will come in at roughly $3.78 billion (a 15.7 percent decline). Attendance also plummeted, and is almost assured of hitting a 25-year low in terms of the number of tickets sold, according to Box Office Mojo.
The sequelitis virus that first invaded Hollywood last year only grew worse this summer. A number of franchise installments underperformed domestically, including Transformers: The Last Knight ($132 million), The Mummy ($80.1 million) and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales ($172 million). While Pirates 5 certainly fared the best, it paled in comparison to the previous installments.
The good news for a worried Hollywood? The international box office — which is up more than 3 percent year-to-date — helped save a number of summer event films that underperformed in the U.S. Pirates 5 has grossed $618 million overseas for a global total of $790 million, while Transformers 5 stands at $604 million globally after earning $474 million offshore. And The Mummy scared up $328 million abroad for a worldwide cume of $407.8 million.
Summer titles that all-out bombed domestically include King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets and The Dark Tower, which kicked off an especially brutal August.
Another sore point was R-rated comedies. Baywatch, The House and Rough Night all bombed despite impressive star wattage. The only film to break the R-rated curse was Malcolm D. Lee'sGirls Trip, from Universal and producer Will Packer, which has earned $108.1 million to date.
"The lesson for Hollywood this summer is that every movie counts when it comes to box office and there are no 'throwaway' titles," says Paul Dergarabedian of comScore. "At least three tentpoles missed the mark in North America as well as a handful of R-rated comedies that left audiences frowning, and the missing revenue from those failures could arguably have left a $500 million-plus void in the marketplace — enough to turn a potentially strong $4 billion-plus summer season heavyweight into a 98-pound weakling."
The tentpole winners of summer were Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, which earned $389.4 million domestically and $862.8 million globally; Wonder Woman ($406.2 million/$806.2 million); Despicable Me 3 ($254.5 million/$971.7 million); and Spider-Man: Homecoming ($318.8 million/$737 million). Smaller gems include Baby Driver and Annabelle: Creation.
Year-to-date, domestic revenue is down 5.7 percent, while international revenue is up nearly 4 percent.

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

American Television System Overview

Television System Overview

There are three TV systems in the United States—

1) Commercial broadcast system;
2) Commercial cable/satellite system; and
3) Public system.

The differences between the three lie primarily with how each produces revenue.

The commercial system relies solely on advertising,

The cable/satellite system relies on a combination of subscription fees + advertising,

and the public system relies on funding from the CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting—a private corporation funded by tax dollars), donations from “viewers like you,” and contributions from foundations.

The dominant system over the past 50+ years has been the commercial broadcast system. This system has five components and they are:

1) networks
2) affiliates
3) studios
4) syndicators
5) advertisers

NETWORKS—
“A network is not much more than several office building in  New York and Los Angeles where highly paid executives package programs they do not own, sell commercial time over airwaves they do not possess to advertising executives they have not met, and provide the programs and ads to a nationwide audience through local stations they do not operate.”

NBC—parent company is Comcast-Universal (affiliated with Universal Studios)
CBS-- parent company is CBS Corp. (affiliated with Paramount Pictures)
ABC -- parent company is Disney (affiliated with Walt Disney Pictures)
FOX--  parent company is 21st Century FOX (formerly Newscorp) (affiliated with 20th-Century FOX Pictures)
CW—owned by CBS and Warner-Bros. (affiliated with Paramount and Warner Bros.).

Networks purchase programs from Hollywood Studios to air on their affiliate stations.  They then sell commercial time and insert those commercials into the programs they transmit to their affiliates.  The affiliate stations receive payment in two ways from the network.  They receive cash payments and they also receive payment in the form of a couple of blank commercial slots in the network programming.  They can sell these commercial spots locally to make additional money.

AFFILIATE STATIONS

 Affiliate stations-- receive much of their programming from the network.  Other programming is provided via the purchase of syndicated programming or they make their own programming (news programs, public affairs, sports specials, etc.) Affiliated stations have signed exclusive contracts with one of the TV networks.

They promise to broadcast a network's programming line-up-- including
prime time;
morning and evening news programs;
sports (some); and
late-night programming.

The programming from the networks comes with national commercials already inserted.  The affiliates receive direct payments from the networks (the amount is dependent on market size) along with some advertising spots to sell.

The U.S. has 210 television "markets" called "DMAs" by Nielsen-- "designated market areas."
You should know the top 10 markets. They are:

1. New York, NY
2. Los Angeles, CA
3. Chicago, IL
4. Philadelphia, PA
5. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
6. San Francisco, CA
7. Washington, DC
8. Boston, MA
9. Atlanta, GA
10. Houston, TX



TV PRODUCTION HOUSES/HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS

They make TV shows… (Networks today produce their own news, newsmagazines, sports programming)…

TV Prod Houses sell/lease their shows to the networks…

Studios---  huge businesses—they’re the film studios…  their shows today dominate the market--  Disney, 20th-Century Fox, Universal, Paramount, Warner Brothers, SONY, CBS-P, Lionsgate… 

TV production houses have been known to lose money for some shows that are leased by the networks. In other words, it often costs more to produce each episode than they can recoup from the network. So why do they bother? Because if they are fortunate enough to get a show into off-network syndication, they get their investment back + enough additional revenue to bankroll all of their other projects.


SYNDICATORS—
“Middlemen”—an exclusive agent that represents a production studio's show to all the TV stations that are constantly shopping around for a product.

They get their money by
1)  a cut of the station license fee (the sum a station pays for the right to air the show); and
2) barter sales (the minute or two of commercial time syndicators sell directly to national advertisers)…

3  types of syndicated programs—

1)    first-run or original syndication (shows like Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy, Ellen, Judge Judy, etc.)
2)    off-network syndication (shows like Friends, Seinfeld, Everybody Loves Raymond, etc.)
3)    old movies (often seen on cable networks) 

The FCC made syndication companies rich by passing the Prime Time Access Rule.  The PTAR simply states that one hour of prime-time programming each evening (with Sunday being the exception) must be non-network programming.  The networks chose to give up the 7-8 p.m. hour of prime-time.  The Prime Time Access Rule has since been disbanded, but the networks have, for the most part, decided not to air programs between 7-8 p.m., except on Sundays.



ADVERTISERS--

Advertising income finances broadcast media content and supports the commercial broadcast industry…


Dayparts—in TV, dayparts determine advertising rates. The basic dayparts are as follows:

early morning,
day,
early fringe,
prime time,
late night,
overnight.

The most expensive parts of the day for advertisers are prime time and fringe. Afternoon and overnight are the cheapest.

Types of program sales for syndicators—

            1) barter—meaning that a local station agrees to air a syndicator’s program in            exchange for some commercial slots.

            2) cash—meaning that a local station agrees to pay a syndicator cash for the rights to air a certain program.

            3) cash + barter—meaning that a local station agrees to pay some cash (less than in a cash deal) for a program + the station gets a few commercial slots. The syndicator delivers the program with national commercials already inserted (making sure to leave some empty slots for the local station).

            Cash + barter is the most common type of sale.

“O & O” stations—an affiliate that is owned and operated by the network. Networks are allowed, per FCC rule, to own a certain number of their own stations. WABC in NYC, for example, is both owned and operated by ABC.

HUT—“households using television”

Station line-up—a list of the TV markets and the individual TV stations in those markets

Upfronts—refer to when the networks invite advertisers (often media buyers) to preview their new shows in an effort to drum up advertising interest. If the advertisers like a show, they will commit to supporting that show (by buying ads) for a certain amount of episodes. For example, Modern Family was quite popular with advertisers and, consequently, ABC’s upfronts for the show were solid—all before the program aired.

Cable TV System
The difference between the commercial broadcast system and the cable system is how revenue is generated. Most of the revenue in cable TV comes from subscription fees. The more leverage a cable network has, the more that network can command from a cable company. When a home pays a cable bill, a portion of that money goes to the cable company, and the rest is divided among all of the networks offered. ESPN brings in more revenue than any other cable network (close to $12 billion per year). Some other cable networks bring in only pennies per month, but when multiplied by 90 million+ homes, it adds up to millions of dollars of revenue. In addition, cable networks can sell TV commercials to generate additional revenue.

All of the major cable networks are owned by the major media companies (Disney, Viacom, 21st-Century Fox, Time-Warner, Comcast-Universal, SONY). 

A list of prominent shows/production companies run by POC

Recognizing that the lack of diversity continues to be a problem in the entertainment media industry, it's important to be aware of thos...