Current Doctor Who Warns Against Facebook 218
judgecorp writes "Matt Smith, the current actor playing Doctor Who, doesn't use Facebook or Twitter, despite his geek icon status. He worries that social media encourages us to create "surrogate versions" or "celebrity versions" of ourselves. He also, arguably, doesn't need their help, being a celebrity already. Smith made the comments in St Petersburg, where he hosted the final of Microsoft's Imagine Cup for student inventors, won this year by a British team with a mesh music-playing application."
Does anyone care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Does anyone care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Some love their privacy
Davros (Revelation of the Daleks, Pt.2): You can not steal what already has been abandoned.
Re: (Score:2)
Some love their privacy
Davros (Revelation of the Daleks, Pt.2): You can not steal what already has been abandoned.
Or as kids say it, "Finders, Keepers" ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That you would assume the GP lives his life by quotes from a TV show, as opposed to simply being a fan who happened to have an apposite quote float to the forefront of his mind, and then that you would be unable to resist the urge to publicly upbraid said poster simply because you don't like how you've assumed he's going about his business just goes to show what a dick you are.
Wise words are still wise, no matter who writes them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sensible?
The Doctor (Score:2, Informative)
Before anybody rants about them calling him "Doctor Who" rather than The Doctor: I'm a huge Who fan and I call him Doctor Who when talking to people who aren't necessarily fans. Saves a lot of time and confusion for everybody.
Re: (Score:2)
I like to call him Herr Doktor and picture him with a monocle. Then I pretend he's the antagonist. It really makes you understand why everyone wants to kill him.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he did save Hitler.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The Doctor (Score:5, Informative)
In my opinion, the 1996 TV movie that everyone claims to abhor has a lot more in common with the modern show than it does with the original run. It's almost like we needed a scapegoat for the change to be accepted, like how the George Lazenby James Bond movie is less well received even though one could argue that it's a much more coherent story than many of the other movies...
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost like we needed a scapegoat for the change to be accepted, like how the George Lazenby James Bond movie is less well received even though one could argue that it's a much more coherent story than many of the other movies...
Most reviewers regard "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" as one of the better Bond movies, if not the best.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's why I liked the modern Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, Craig's portrayal is allowed to both suffer and grow from his experiences.
Haven't seen Skyfall yet to see if that continues or not. I hope that it does.
Re: (Score:2)
we all know that Bond is really a Time Lord, right?
Timothy Dalton was the president.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sylvester McCoy's umbrella had a question mark incorporated into the design of its handle.
The phrase "Doctor who?" and similar ones have appeared as a running joke throughout the run of the series, including a "Doctor Whoever-you-are" from Tegan when she first met the Doctor in "Logopolis." The only time the Doctor has actually been referred to as "Doctor Who" in the series was in a First Doctor story, "The War Machines" (1966); this is acknowledged as a mistake. The title of the series comes from the fir
Re: (Score:2)
Adding to the confusion, he was referred to as "Doctor Who" once (The War Machines) and one story was titled "Doctor Who And The Silurians" onscreen.
You're right about the question mark theme. Sylvester McCoy (nice man) had a question-mark handle on his umbrella and a jumper covered in the things, though they did start to tone it down towards the end.
Re: (Score:2)
The question marks on the collars started late in the Tom Baker years - IIRC they showed up in "Full Circle". It was a John Nathan-Turner thing, and the question mark was part of the costume through most of his run as producer.
Totally wrong in-character, but I suspect it helped make the show more accessible to new viewers, worked better in press shots, and the like. The days when basically everyone who got the BBC live knew who he was had passed, and the show was in decline, so maybe it helped. (The raw
Re:The Doctor (Score:4)
I'm not a Doctor Who fan, and when I first heard "The Doctor", I thought of the holographic Doctor on Star Trek Voyager.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought of the holographic Doctor on Star Trek Voyager.
I remember that character, but I always want to call him "Dr. Cinnamon" thanks to a Mad Magazine parody of Voyager.
The screwy stuff our brains retain and subsequently cobble together...
Side note: Chris Eccleston was a better doctor than a lot of people give him credit for; second best, IMO, just after Tennant.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, but only if we are talking about the current run.
Re: (Score:2)
Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. (Score:5, Interesting)
Creating a surrogate or celebrity version of oneself is precisely the point of Facebook. It is a version of the self that can be exchanged through a social medium with others. That "surrogate" self can be be cited, exalted, devalued, and circulated. It's "celebrity" for people who don't necessarily have access to major media channels and networks of people to promote a traditional media celebrity self.
Everyone's gonna get their 15 minutes.
The question, to my mind, is why Matt Smith believe this is any different than the media that have made a surrogate version of him.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by the rate at which EVERYONE creates accounts on Facebook or Twitter, soon enough (few years) you could be famous for NOT using it.
Re:Surrogate versions? Andy Warhol said it best. (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe the term surrogate here is being used to mean substitute. As in abandoning ones real personality and substituting one created in social media.
In the past, it was accepted for some people to have stage names (or nom de plume). It was a way to separate work from private life. The stage name could go with an invented personality. Sometimes it was a character name that became associated with an actor. They could ham it up, then go home. It only got weird when someone permanently became the caricature they created.
With traditional media, that was limited and controlled. Not many people had reasons for stage names, and when and where they had to use it was easier to define. And the true wackos (unless it was matched by great talent) were sidelined.
With social media, everyone is creating a stage name. And blurring the lines of when they are using it. They spend huge amounts of time polishing the image they project. They use it as a substitute for real interactions with other human beings. For some, it becomes a warped substitute for their actual personality, which they neglect. Not for everyone, but all to many people.
As the actor playing the Doctor, Matt has seen some of the pressure to become the surrogate personality. To become the Doctor 24/7. He believes social media increases that pressure. So he's opted out of social media. And he's suggesting that others would benefit from opting out too. Not because there isn't anything to be gained, but because creating and becoming a surrogate personality is not worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
With social media, everyone is creating a stage name. And blurring the lines of when they are using it.
Not me, but maybe I should. I should create a fake personality for use on Slashdot that doesn't get upset when people say things that they would never, ever say to my face. Because these are the kinds of things I would say to them in person if they spouted that kind of offensive bullshit in the same context. That is, during the time when such things have happened.
Re: (Score:2)
well you can do the alternative with hotmail and ms services. create a real version of yourself for ms/nsa. the info is more useful if it's not beautified for fb.
Re: (Score:2)
But why? If everyone is a celebrity then the value of being one is nil. I know several wise and effective people who never draw attention to themselves- and most of their associates hold them in high regard.
Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' (Score:4, Interesting)
Or just, 'Matt Smith Warns Against Face Book'. We know who Matt Smith is.
I stopped watching Doctor Who after all of season 5 blew huge balls, and the first handful of episodes of season 6 (except, partially, the one written by Neil Gaiman) were even worse. Still, given they've in the past mercilessly made fun of stuff like people relying on their GPS, I would not have been at all surprised if Current Doctor Who had indeed warned against Facebook, which could have been amusing. But why should I care about the opinions of a random actor?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I stopped watching Doctor Who after all of season 5 blew huge balls
What? Patrick Troughton was great, and I loved the Yeti in the web-filled London Underground tunnels. (And Lethbridge-Stewart showing up for the first time).
Or are you talking about someother season 5?
Re: (Score:2)
Shush. You know what I mean. (Though I have watched some of old-actually-season-1. I thought it was extremely dull. I haven't gotten around to watching any of the *later* old-DW, though.)
Re: (Score:2)
Shush. You know what I mean. (Though I have watched some of old-actually-season-1. I thought it was extremely dull. I haven't gotten around to watching any of the *later* old-DW, though.)
Of all the Doctors, it embarrasses me to admit I like the original one the least. He was a lying, pompous cowardly old weasel, or such was his affectation, anyway. Then again, he'd apparently spent several hundred years wearing out what may have been his original body and that's enough to make anyone's joints ache.
The first season of any TV show tends to be a bit rough, though. It got better. Helps if you can enjoy budget special-effects.
Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' (Score:5, Funny)
Hah. I watched it when it was first broadcast.
Did you tape it by any chance? I'm missing a few episodes.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah. I watched it when it was first broadcast.
Did you tape it by any chance? I'm missing a few episodes.
Sure - you've got betamax right?
Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' (Score:5, Funny)
Hah, I am watching it when it was first broadcast.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds to me like it's homophobia that has ruined Doctor Who for you. Why do homosexual characters have to be necessary? Can't they just be characters that happen to be homosexual? What exactly is "leftist" about acknowledging that homosexuals exist, and that they form relationships like anyone else?
That Vastra & Jenny bother you and Amy & Rory do not says a lot more about you than it does about Doctor Who.
Re:Title should be 'Actor Currently Playing...' (Score:5, Insightful)
My problem is it feels like the writers shoehorned the characters in to appeal to the gay community. It is said that Dr. Who is very popular among the gay population as the character of the Dr is indifferent to things like religion, race, sex, etc. He is always on the side of good, he fights for everyones rights. So they jumped on that train and awkwardly shoved gay characters into the story.
Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.
Re: (Score:2)
My problem is it feels like the writers shoehorned the characters in to appeal to the gay community. It is said that Dr. Who is very popular among the gay population as the character of the Dr is indifferent to things like religion, race, sex, etc. He is always on the side of good, he fights for everyones rights. So they jumped on that train and awkwardly shoved gay characters into the story.
Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.
Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about what's happening in the real world these days?
Re: (Score:2)
Its so in your face that it feels fake which ruins the story.
Do you feel the same way about Amy & Rory's in your face heterosexuality?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tell that to clevernickname (Score:2)
NT
Finding old friends (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of Facebook or Twitter either. I DO think they have their uses, such as Facebook finding old friends you lost touch with years ago and to be hang-outs for fans and clubs and whatever. And some Twitter feeds are quite useful, giving news or humorous anecdotes.
But yeh, I've seen what Matt Smith is talking about. People exaggerate how "into" something they are, yet I know them in real life and the cause / sport / whatever they claim to be so into.... they maybe spend one weekend a year doing.
And some twitter rants: they just forward something they heard on Twitter and feel it's the truth, when you dig past the onion layers and find out it's not. But, I read it on Twitter Umm, good for you? That doesn't make it true.
Re: (Score:3)
the problem with his comments is that it applies to .. well, everything social.
especially so to even letter correspondents which used to be popular for people to communicate - a lot of it was so full of formal bullshit fantasy they're not even funny to read, but that was the 'facebook' back then, you'd get maybe an introductionary letter from someone else in your field or whatever and start the letters... and people would write beautified versions of events in them - of course back then it was easier to get
Not as simple as that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Believe it or not, some of us aren't liars and pretenders and actually try to always be ourselves.
Indeed; conversely, however, some of us who aren't liars or pretenders have had to develop social masks as a means of survival, as our default personality types do not necessarily conform with what employers/other people in general find to be acceptable behavior, even if it harms no one.
FWIW, while I firmly believe complete honesty is always the best policy, my experience is that being honest tends to do more harm than good, especially in employment-related situations.
Re: (Score:2)
Very true! Automatons who can forget they're human are in high demand.
Whatever, dude. You can try to pretend that you're somehow different (and thus, in your mind, better) than the rest of us, but I'd put dollars to pesos that you act differently around your parents than you do when with people you're trying to have sex with, just like the rest of us.
Fine, no one is making you (Score:2)
But don't get all preachy about it either. Just because you don't watch TV doesn't mean you have to be the snob prick at the party who has to constantly remind everyone "I don't even *OWN* a TV".
Matt, wake up. (Score:2)
. He worries that social media encourages us to create "surrogate versions" or "celebrity versions" of ourselves
It's common knowledge that in a new relationship, the first year with someone you don't really meet them, just their representative. Everyone puts on a different face in public, or for new people. This isn't news to anyone who isn't Forever Alone guy. Social media doesn't "encourage" us; We already do it anyway. Social media just allows this to be more transparent.
It's no surprise Facebook doesn't have a "dislike" button, or that there's no notification if someone "unfriends" you or blocks you. Even the web
Re:Matt, wake up. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not everybody lies. It's what makes some of us 'socially'' awkward.
Liar. You're socially awkward because you never leave the basement. :D
Bit odd for some one (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...and he gets paid to do it!
Seems pretty geeky (Score:5, Insightful)
I know tons of geeks who eschew social media so I think it actually gives him geek cred.
Doesn't sound like much of a warning ... (Score:2)
... more of a commentary around the importance some people place on social media. Slightly tabloid, this slashdot article is. Mmmm...
not surprising (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I initially set up an account to let the folks on my forum know when the server took a dump since most of my users are also on Facebook. Now I'm using it when I go on hikes or motorcycle trips. I can double snap a picture; one on my tourist camera and one on my iPhone in order to post to Facebook for my friends to "like".
And I've been into computers/in IT since 1980. So count me in the 'least likely' group. There are a few of us (I'm not quite in the Senior Citizen group...)
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
AOL packaged up the ISP access with a web and email client. Users didnt have to be tech savvy and didnt have to know about the other ways to accomplish "getting online." It was easy. But savvy users found it limiting and too expensive for what it did.
Similar thing with Facebook. Savvy users consider the privacy issues too burdensome and find other ways to accomplish the same things. But for the masses "it just works."
As the masses become more and
Re: (Score:3)
I noticed that a ton of IT students at my college don't use Facebook. And it wasn't some hippie fine arts college or something with people bringing typewriters in to be ironic, it's a low cost public one. So I researched it and in the #1 most likely demographics to use Facebook, the least likely group within it is IT professionals. I have a feeling we're all on to something, as I don't use it either.
Sounds like a good "Ask Slashdot" poll idea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, I'm not IT, but I don't use it because it seems faddish first off. I'm not google though, with very few people on the list since I don't go out and add everyone possible. Though given the idiocy that arrives there at times I can only imagine that Facebook is one hundred times worse.
At times I am tempted to go to facebook just to look someone up, but then the feeling passes. If I keep ignoring an invite request will that person think I'm being rude? If I don't invite someone will they also think I'm
orly? (Score:2)
Despite?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Emphasis mine. That's like saying someone doesn't smoke, despite being a doctor.
He makes sense (Score:2)
Sounds like... (Score:2)
... elites not wanting their status undermined.
Technology that has brought people closer together has allowed a great deal to be changed in the perception of things in many fields.
I.E. Music, Movies, and more.... and now there is what he is concerned about.... star status
Not the best candidate for anti-facebook (Score:4, Funny)
Numerous studies have been done indicating that it's not just an alter-ego problem. Here [davidrainoshek.com] is a fantastic post on the deeper issues. As with TV, there are addiction mechanisms build in to keep you doing it. Of course lets not mention altering your brain waves and making you less able to process information.
old school (Score:4, Interesting)
yes back in the late 80's i owned a software company that wrote addons for a BBS system called the MajorBBS that was really one of the first true multi-user online systems available for the general public to own and deploy. the interesting thing was that, consistently, when sysops ran the numbers, online chat represented 85-95% of the use of these systems that allowed all sorts of other really cool things to do, in real-time, with other users.
the point of this is that facebook and twitter are really nothing more then personalized chat rooms, and looking back it isnt surprising at all that they represent the 800lb gorillas of the internet because, to be honest, it seems that all everyone really ever wanted to do online is chat (besides pr0n and "research" of course).
i think a facebook backlash is inevitable, like everyone hating nickleback or david guetta...i stopped using it except to get a hold of my kids about a year ago, and i enjoy letting people know i think its a total waste of time...now if i was younger i could see a lot more useful uses for it, like hooking up...but im sure Matt Smith isnt hurting along those lines.
More accurate than Surrogate (Score:2)
"Surrogate versions?" that's kind of funny when you consider the vast complexity of what you're actually creating. social media is a not-so-private index-able record of events and contacts in your personal life complete with timestamps, pictures, anecdotes and exacting degrees of separation to others -- added bonus is the illusion of privacy. It's hardly surrogate when you consider the social profile may actually be MORE accurate that the IRL version.
New Summery for you. (Score:2)
"Matt Smith, the current actor playing Doctor Who, doesn't use Facebook or Twitter, despite his geek icon status. He also worries that social media encourages us normals to have more outstanding view points and to express our selves rather the welcoming our new meta-media overlords" -I for one welcome our new Microsoft music playing overloads.
Beware the advice of the successful, (Score:3)
real reason (Score:2)
And why he avoids youtube
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=xDj7gvc_dsA&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DxDj7gvc_dsA [youtube.com]
Rule One (Score:2)
Just the Opposite (Score:2)
Every single celebrity I have ever social networked with online has completely broken any celebrity preconceptions I had.
You, the fan, should not add any celebrities you really like to your FB or twitter feed. As it is impossible to keep the celebrity mystique without writing and CGI staff.
I was so disappointed after adding Riddlick that I unfollowed him.
And it was only last week that I got into an argument with the writer/designer of Babylon 5 on FB. And I came away from that with far less respect for him
Just wow! (Score:2)
An actor who is afraid that other people play out their acting fantasies.
What a dick.
Re:Duh. (Score:5, Funny)
Thank you Captain Obvious.
That's Doctor Obvious.
Re:Duh. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Duh. (Score:5, Interesting)
Funny as it sounds, I read the title as "Doctor, who warns against Facebook" - so I read on thinking it was about an actual doctor warning against Facebook for some weird health reason. :)
So it should have sounded as "Current Doctor Who who warns..."
Re: (Score:2)
Except "Doctor Who" is just a common response to the character's name "The Doctor" so to those familiar with the show, your parsing still makes more sense.
Re: (Score:2)
You only know it's about the show AFTER you read the summary. The title doesn't tell you that at all. :)
Sadly, I am not really familiar with the show either
Re: (Score:2)
Except "Doctor Who" is just a common response to the character's name "The Doctor"
Oh, it's a lot more than that now. See link in my sig for more information ;)
Re: (Score:2)
That's only relevant in-character. To the outside world, the character is "Doctor Who", like it or not. Doesn't help any that for a few years his costume included question marks on the collars, at JNT's insistence - the battle was lost in the Baker years.
Re: (Score:2)
Except "Doctor Who" is just a common response to the character's name "The Doctor" so to those familiar with the show, your parsing still makes more sense.
Except that in that case the who is superfluous (it makes it sound as if there's a line of doctors waiting for their turn to warn us about Facebook). It should be "Current Doctor Warns Against Facebook". Which makes me wonder who gets a doctorate in current...
Re: (Score:2)
Hu's on first (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doctor Obvious
Re: (Score:2)
Who's there?
Doctor.
Doctor Who?.
Correct
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who's there?
The Interrupting Cow.
The Interrupti-
MOO!
Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You see, THAT annoys me.
Personally I stay off Facebook. I made some dummy account years back just because I was unsuccessfully try to find an old friend I'd lost touch with. It's still there gather dust, I have ZERO friends on it and no posts since the day it was created like 3 years ago.
I'm in IT and I know people that feel the same way, they don't want to bother with the fake socialization or post stuff out there linked to their real name for the whole world to see. I have 10 years of experience behind me and a Masters in Computer Science. If that's not enough to show I'm in the IT field then it's a sad state of the field that someone with 1 year of experience and a FaceBook account would get preference.
Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Funny - I tell prospective colleagues that my FB account is for my hobbies; if they would like to connect to me professionally they may send me an invitation on LinkedIn. On a related note, I also don't give out my personal cell phone number. If you want to get in touch with me, call my office phone and leave a message or send me an email, or send a text message to my office number.
Re:Unfortunately, not all of us have that choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
That's too bad. I purposefully do not link my Facebook account with anyone at work (anyone at all). I have to work with these guys. Finding out they're racist assholes makes it a bit harder to deal with them without having to think about their personal beliefs.
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
A few years back when I was looking for work out of college, virtually every prospective employer asked to be friended, or asked what my FB/Twitter/etc. accounts were. When I told them that I didn't bother to spill my guts online to all and sundry, the interview was terminated, and was told something along the lines of , "no FB account is like not having a phone or E-mail address, and we don't want any useless Luddites blocking progress in our company."
I suspect you are lying.
Re: (Score:2)
Ex-ter-mi-nate!
TFTFY
Re: (Score:2)
I use it for moments I want to share. It's a public journal. I also remember my audience. My mom is listed as a friend as well as my boss. This helps keep me from posting stupid, compromising stuff. People that do post that kind of stuff would find another outlet to make public fools of themselves if there was no facebook.
When my wife pasted away in May, it was extremely useful for contacting her friends and posting rosary and funeral information. It also gave people a public outlet to for them to pay
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And don't forget the fez. Fezzes are cool.
Re:Don't use non-MS products (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)