Facebook is the suburbs while Twitter is the city

Interesting take for me as a a media student to read

articulate discontent

Social networks enable varied forms of interaction between their users, through spectrums of openness, hierarchy, and discovery. Facebook and Twitter are the most used services to connect people socially, but bring people together in surprisingly different ways. Facebook’s strengths rely on easily connecting with established networks, showing highlights, and sharing meta-actions (like posting pictures or events). Twitter’s advantages lie in instant communication, building ad-hoc networks, and providing public and widely accessible information.

Why compare social networks to geographical networks? I’ll argue that the same openness, hierarchy, and discovery also applies to suburbs and the city, greatly affecting our modes of relationship. Suburbs span a large area, creating both silos of community and a greater privacy. Suburbs aren’t great for meeting people, but they do provide a framework for connecting disjointed entities to a center.

In comparison, cities move quickly and connect people through greater density. People gather at the local events…

View original post 1,058 more words


A little too literal

Studying literature is sometimes a funny thing. Perhaps we add meaning to words that were written in a fit of anger or a moment of lust, fueled by fleeting insanity wherein sense is abandoned. If I write that the curtain is red, you could interpret that statement as my anger clouding my eyes in rage till I see everything in a maroon shade, but maybe, just maybe, the curtain really is red.


“All that glitters is not always gold.”

My dad quoted this to me just before he passed away when I was ten years old and having gone through a lot since then I realise how true this simple statement is. Behind a single line lies a row of implications.