fresherfury

[fresherfury]

[fresherfury]

Ivy: Wellington’s Home for Wayward Queens

Ivy Bar and Cabaret is a gay club found on Wellington’s iconic Cuba Street. The bar is home to Wellington’s ever-growing drag and LGBT+ communities, as it is a safe and inviting space for us. I chose Ivy for this project because it is integral to many of the relationships I have formed in Wellington. I have found my place in this city because of the opportunities this space has given me and the people it has put into my life. Drag as an art form is still a very niche thing, and it is a subculture that encompasses a lot of different aspects of my personality and interests. Having a space that allows me to meet like minded people made my transition to Wellington all the easier. I have found mentors through my drag family who have shown me the ropes and given me opportunities that I wouldn’t have had given to me anywhere else. I am now employed as a drag queen in a performance group, I am a paid performer and have been given other work opportunities just by creating my drag persona, Violet Tendencies.

I feel as though if you are not part of one of these communities, you would not hold the same perspective of Ivy as I do. Ivy is predominantly represented through social media via personal profiles of the patrons and performers of the bar. Although Ivy has an online presence itself through a Facebook page and Instagram profile, these accounts are mainly managed by the bartenders, who are often performers at Ivy and the local drag queens. Ivy’s Facebook and Instagram profiles combined have a following of 5,462 people whereas the combined follower counts of the queens and other performers that represent this space is well over 15,000. The social capital of Ivy’s ‘official’ online presence is vastly different to that of Ivy’s ‘unofficial’ presence online, demonstrating how Ivy is typically represented moreso by the community that uses the space than the space itself, which is discussed in "Branding In The Post-Internet Era." where the brand manager (Ivy) is no longer a `guardian' that is responsible for its own representation of the brand but becomes more of a brand `host' (Christodoulides, George).

This space is represented using a number of different platforms and their varying affordances (Hutchby, Ian). Queens and patrons often use Snapchat and Snapchat stories with geofilters or captions that promote Ivy during live shows or when events are held, signalling to friends around the Wellington region as to what is happening at the bar with real time updates. This also happens on Instagram. Instagram also affords performers to promote shows and events on their personal profiles, as well as go ‘live’ when getting ready for the night which gives hype to events. The queens have a very strong network on Instagram. The interactive affordances of Instagram such as tagging, liking and commenting means that the performers can promote each other on their personal profiles, giving followers the opportunity to see more content by Wellington performers outside of Ivy as well as creating a strong online community which reflects the nature of the relationship between performers and patrons in the space.

I am telling the story of my journey becoming a drag queen in this space. I have tried to convey Ivy as a physical and digital space that i not limited to alcohol and partying, but rather a meeting place, performance space and creative outlet. Ivy is not typically represented this way but I believe it offers insight into an interesting community in Wellington. Drag in New Zealand is notoriously underrepresented and the opportunities for drag still do not keep up with the growing rate of the Ivy’s drag community. With more representation of the queens that make up Ivy, I hope to create greater awareness about the community and bring it more into Wellington’s cultural mainstream. Not only this, but I hope to offer insight into drag as an artform and hope to promote diversity and to aid in the personal journeys of people questioning their space in the LGBT+ community.

Works Cited:

Christodoulides, George. "Branding In The Post-Internet Era." Marketing Theory, vol 9, no. 1, 2009, pp. 141-144. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1177/1470593108100071.

Hutchby, Ian. "Technologies, Texts And Affordances." Sociology, vol 35, no. 2, 2001, pp. 441-456. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1177/s0038038501000219.

[fresherfury]

[fresherfury]

[fresherfury]

When Influencers do Activism Right

Question Prompt: Provide an example of an online activist campaign (e.g. a link to a news story, website, online petition, Facebook group, or something similar) and briefly explain the goals of the online action. Do you think your selected action has the potential to result in real-world change or is it merely an example of “slacktivism”? Why?

There is nothing more fake and ego-fueling than a charity auction. You see one almost every episode of the Real Housewives, where filthy rich wives parade around wearing Gucci and sipping on Dom Pérignon. It is hard to believe that these auctions benefit anyone but the viewers of these scandalous shows, offering a lot of drama that fans feed off.

YouTuber duo H3H3 Productions (Ethan and Hila Klein) put their own spin on the classic charity auction by taking advantage of their almost 5 million strong subscriber count and utilising new online platform Tiltify. Together with special guests Justin Roiland (creator of Rick and Morty) and Alex Hirsch (creator of Gravity Falls), H3H3 raised over $230,000 for charity Direct Relief through fans bidding on unique items and experiences donated by these content creators. Fans of Rick and Morty and Gravity Falls were able to pick up extremely rare collectors items in return for donating to an extremely worthy cause- hurricane relief.

[Justin Roiland writes a phrase of the viewer’s choice on Ethan Klein’s double chin. This is one example of the types of things that the viewers that was won by a viewer 

Malcolm Gladwell writes in his article ‘Small Change’ that the instruments provided by social media in the Internet age offer activists greater efficiency and ease. This is demonstrated in Clay Shirky’s “Here Comes Everybody”, as shown in Malcolm’s article, but also in the context of this new form of charity auction hosted by social media influencers. H3H3 raised this money and awareness in around 5 hours. To give this a bit of context, raising money for charity in the pre-internet age would see methods such as philanthropic donations, bucket collections, charity concerts and auctions etc. to be utilised. The ease and efficiency of an online auction has meant that money for natural disasters can be raised as soon as possible, providing relief in a far more efficient way than any Band-Aid song could have ever done.

Influencers are often coined ‘Slacktivists’ for their half hearted bids at activism. Often these are just miserable attempts at clickbait- like the recent surge in ‘social experiment’ videos featuring homeless people. YouTubers have been criticised for not actually wanting to help homeless people, but using them to boost their social capital by showing how genuine and selfless they are.

[Search results for ‘feeding the homeless’ on YouTube. Some of these videos are created by ‘prank channels’ which often use clickbait and manufactured ‘reality’ for views.]

I think that the auction held by H3H3 has shown a new generation of social media influencers using their social power for good. Not only has H3H3 raised an incredible amount of money for Direct Relief, but they also spent most of their over 5 hour long podcast to educate their viewers on the extent of damage caused by the hurricanes and what they can do to help. H3H3 has offered their viewers a chance to be socially responsible and to contribute to the recovery of such horrific damage, which I think many influencers should take a lesson from.

[fresherfury]

Ivy Bar and Cabaret: On and Offline

Question Prompt:

Locate the space/place you will build a story about for your digital storytelling assignment. Explain the various ways this space is represented in existing digital media/platforms. Who is the “author” of this space? In other words, what opportunities does the technology user have to contribute to the definition of this space/place?

My special place is an unlikely one. It rests in the basement of an old shopping arcade and it only ever comes alive late at night. It is home to some of the most interesting. passionate and forward-thinking people in Wellington and I couldn’t be prouder to be part of the community.

A lot of my interests fall into a certain subculture. I love drag, club culture, makeup, art, fashion and anything that is described as ‘Avant-Garde’. I tried desperately to find people like me in my hometown but it was nearly impossible.I started painting my face like a drag queen after school and dancing around my room lip synching to Gwen Stefani, never thinking a girl would be accepted as a drag queen in any gay bar in New Zealand. I wanted to find people like me, so I used social media to do it.

I started following as many New Zeland drag queens I could on any social media platform I could find. They are all friends- part of such a warm and welcoming community, so it wasn’t hard to find them all. It is a perfect example of how connected we all are. I could look through tagged photos on Instagram and see that they all would hang out together at one certain bar. If you find one queen on social media, you can find them all. 

The common denominator for all of these queens is where they can be found on a Friday night. All of them can be found at Ivy Bar and Cabaret, nestled at the top of the iconic Cuba Street in Wellington City. 

Ivy doesn’t need to promote itself. It doesn’t really need a Facebook page or an Instagram. Everyone who goes there plays a role in Ivy’s online presence, demonstrating how the representation of Ivy is contributed to by many different authors. When a drunk by-day receptionist takes a selfie with a drag queen and posts it on Instagram with the caption ‘YASSS slay mamaw’, she instantly supports and promotes the gay community in Wellington. Ivy itself does not promote itself much on social media because it is up to us queens to do that. All of the local queens proudly share events and invite everyone we can to shows. We take and post all the pictures for social media and we welcome everyone to visit our safe, queer space. 

[Mx Capital Drag 2017 Harlie Lux promotes an upcoming show on her Facebook page]

Jason Farman talks about how physical spaces like Ivy and it’s virtual representation can sometimes be closer than you think. They don’t always exist as the physical space and the virtual space. During the annual Mx Capital Drag competition, which is a RuPaul’s Drag Race style competition, technology plays a huge role. The shows are live streamed on Facebook, meaning that the show’s audience stretches far beyond the walls of Ivy and to anyone who can’t be in the space physically. Not only this, but certain challenges are vlogged each week and then shown at the competition. For example, the queens must create an outfit using $20 only at Paper Bag Princess, a local vintage store. Earlier in the week, the queens filmed this segment which was then shown in the club and posted on Facebook. 

This demonstrates how the physical and virtual representations of Ivy are contributed to by many authors, not just the bar itself but the patrons of it and the artists who perform there. 

[fresherfury]

The Changing Affordances on YouTube and What This Means for Content Creators

YouTube has recently been heavily criticised due to drastic changes in the way content creators are remunerated for their work on the platform. Brands have expressed concern at their lack of control over what sort of YouTube videos their brand is being advertised on, calling for YouTube to alter their monetisation policy and community guidelines to force content creators to be more ‘Advertiser Friendly’. YouTube’s remunerative affordances used to enable content creators to make a career on the platform, but recent changes in YouTube’s community guidelines has greatly affected this. YouTube has decided that much of the content that has been monetised in the past has been too inappropriate for brands to advertise on. Violence, nudity, profanity and even as much as the mention of ‘sensitive social issues’ have been deemed not ‘friendly’ for brands. According to the new YouTube community guidelines and the updated monetisation policy, the affordances of the platform for content creators have changed, affecting how creators use the platform for business.  This has also meant that the previously acceptable content is now considered a breach of the written ‘social norms’ of YouTube. YouTube’s remunerative affordances used to enable content creators to make a career on the platform, but recent changes in YouTube’s community guidelines has greatly been detrimental to how creators use the platform.

YouTube is an online video platform that has approximately one billion monthly users, which counts for almost a third of internet users (Google Inc “YouTube for Press.”). These users are made up of content creators (colloquially called ‘YouTubers’) and viewers. The affordances of the platform are all of the actions that can take place on it- or to summarise, what the platform allows users to do on it (Hutchby 441-453). YouTube affords you to post video content online that can then be viewed by anyone in the world. For viewers, YouTube affords you to like, dislike and comment on videos, which is an important part of YouTube’s successful community model (Villi, Mikko, Matikainen 101-114). This interaction between creators and viewers has created a strong community bond that has resulted in the more popular content creators to gain large amounts of social capital and become online celebrities, or, micro-celebrities (Marwick 74-93). YouTube affords content creators to be remunerated for their videos based on the amount of interaction between viewers and the video, or, their popularity. AdSense is a division of Google that pairs brands with advertising spots on websites, including YouTube. A content creator can be paid for allowing AdSense to place advertisements before or during videos, or around the video page. Google’s AdSense product affords advertisements to be specifically targeted to demographics based on the content of their previous web searches and videos watched on YouTube, this kind of targeted marketing works for brands, leading to the success of YouTube’s advertising programs, which directly affect the revenues for content creators on YouTube. The more viewers who see the advertisement results in a larger profit for content creators. This allows YouTubers to have a career in content creation- whether this be makeup tutorials, news media, vlogs etc. Incentivising content production on YouTube has ensured there is no shortage of videos on a variety of different topics. Not only this, but brands can directly contact creators for advertisements in their videos. This may be in the form of product placement, affiliate links, coupon codes etc. YouTube is a market leader in online video content because it affords creators and viewers to have a mutually beneficial relationship, the user gets to watch free video media as well as create content for a profit, while brands get to advertise to viewers.

In early 2017, 250 major brands such as Marks & Spencer, HSBC, Audi, The Guardian, and L’Oréal withdrew advertisements that were unknowingly being advertised on extremist videos and boycotted advertising on YouTube. This is what is known in the media as the ‘Adpocalypse’. This is an example about how the advertising and monetisation affordances can be co-opted for disruptive acts. Unsatisfactory filters were in place to make sure that inappropriate content was not being paired with brands who do not share the same ideologies as portrayed in the video content. YouTube afforded content creators to have a reasonably high level of creative freedom when it came to what videos were allowed on the platform. Illegal acts, pornography and copyrighted material were prohibited but the community guidelines were far less restrictive than what it is now. Due to the affordances of the platform prior to the updated community guidelines, the platform was easily co-opted for disruptive acts (Hutchby 453-456). Violence and profanity were and still are very common in YouTube skits for example. Top-tier content creator Shane Dawson now has over 10 million subscribers on his channel and grew popular through his viral skits. A character that he commonly played on his channel was extremely crass and based on the racist stereotype of a black woman. He has spoken out on his podcast ‘Shane and Friends’ that he sees now that his creative choices at the time would not be allowed on YouTube in 2017 and there is ‘Absolutely no way’ his videos would remain monetised. “No brand wants to work with me because of my old videos.” YouTube has a written code outlining the social norms of the platform and although content creators are now being held accountable for producing anti-social media, inappropriate content is still found on the platform due to the inability to screen every video before it is uploaded to the platform.

[Popular news YouTuber Philip DeFranco covers the ‘Adpocalypse’, with reference to YouTubers Ethan Klein of H3H3 Productions and Jenna Marbles. Philip DeFranco had many videos demonetised due to the news stories he covers being classified as containing ‘Sensitive Social Issues’ and ‘Political Matters’]

[H3H3Productions speak out about the extent of damage resulting from the Adpocalypse. The video thumbnails featuring a red ‘X’ have all been demonetised without notification from YouTube Inc.]

As a result of the Adpocalypse, many top-tier creators who depended on YouTube as their sole income had to step away from the platform. While YouTube previously had the affordance of remunerating creators for their work, now is unable to do so meaning that these creators are seeing their recent videos being demonetised without warning. This loss of remuneration forced YouTubers to use platforms like Patreon in order to continue creating content and be financially sustainable. An effect of YouTube’s inadequacy to remunerate its creators is a number of top-tier creators resorting to using Patreon, merchandise sales, book sales, ticket sales from touring, music, Fullscreen shows etc. Patreon, arguably the most popular tool for creators to be remunerated is a crowdsourced and community-based platform which affords viewers to pay a monthly donation to content creators which is repaid in the form of perks; rewards from merchandise to advanced video streaming to being credited in videos. Platforms such as Patreon affords YouTubers to continue creating content when YouTube has revoked the previous affordance of being able to do so itself. Fullscreen, a division of AT&T Mobile, is a platform that affords YouTubers to create television-style series or podcast in a studio setting. Fullscreen works similarly to any television studio where content creators pitch shows to the studio and enters into an episode by episode contract. ‘Shane and Friends’ recently got picked up by Fullscreen to be recorded live in a studio. The full series is now available on Fullscreen, where viewers pay a monthly subscription to unlimited content in the app. It has become very apparent that many content creators are having to resort to these sorts of platforms when you look at the description boxes and title cards of videos in the last three or four months, demonstrating the effects of the ‘Adpocalypse’ on content creators.

[Binging with Babish features a title card with information regarding Patreon in each of his recent videos. He receives over USD$10,000 per month from Patrons on Patreon.]

Due to the overwhelming negative response from advertisers using AdSense, YouTube had to change their monetisation policy and community guidelines to reflect the type of material that is deemed appropriate on the platform. Content creators suffered heavily as the affordances of the platform drastically changed. YouTube had previously afforded creators and viewers to have a mutually beneficial relationship, the user gets to watch free video media as well as create content for a profit, while brands get to advertise to viewers. As a result of the ‘Adpocalypse’, the affordances of the platform have changed, now making it very difficult for content creators to earn a sustainable income while also protecting creative integrity. Potentially damaging and anti-social media can still appear on the platform, demonstrating how the affordances of the platform can be co-opted for disruptive acts. This change in the structure of the platform as a whole has made it increasingly difficult for YouTube to become a career without the aid of other online tools such as Patreon or Fullscreen for many content creators and is overall greatly detrimental how creators use the platform.

Works Cited

Fullscreen (2017). CupcakKe & Tana Mongeau - Shane And Friends - Ep. 100. [podcast] Shane and Friends. Available at: https://soundcloud.com/shaneandfriends/episode-100-cupcakke-tana [Accessed 26 Sep. 2017].

Google Inc. “YouTube for Press.” YouTube, YouTube, 2017, www.youtube.com/yt/about/press/.

H3H3Productions.  “We’re at an Important Crossroad in our Lives” YouTube, 31st March 2017. Web. 26th September 2017.

Hutchby, Ian. “Technologies, Texts and Affordances.” Sociology, vol. 35, no. 2, 2001, pp. 441–456., doi:10.1017/s0038038501000219.

MARWICK, ALICE E. “LEADERS AND FOLLOWERS: Status in the Tech Scene.” Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2013, pp. 73–111. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vkzxr.5.

Support.google.com. (2017). Advertiser-friendly content guidelines - YouTube Help. [online] Available at: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en [Accessed 25 Sep. 2017].

Villi, Mikko, and Janne Matikainen. "Participation in Social Media: Studying Explicit and Implicit Forms of Participation in Communicative Social Networks." Media and Communication, vol. 4, no. 4, 2016, ProQuest Central; Technology Collection, https://search.proquest.com/docview/1908475972?accountid=14782, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v4i4.578.

[fresherfury]

Social Media Marketing

Question Prompt: Survey your social media profiles and identify an instance of target marketing. Discuss how accurate it is to your interests. Why do you think this particular ad appears where it does?

When I open Facebook I am often shown advertisements that are clearly targeted towards the student demographic. The particular traits about me used by marketers to target me are my age, location, gender, pages I follow, as well as recent online searches.

An example I have seen of this recently was after purchasing a wig online, I was shown advertisements from the site I purchased it from, as well as some competitors, for some time after I had made the purchase. This is an example of how such a niche audience (myself; wigs) was easily targeted by marketing. Facebook uses the caches stored in the web browser to scour past searches and history to pool similar targeted marketing suitable for me.

This form of personalised and targeted marketing can be particularly controversial, and seen by some as an invasion of privacy. Facebook does allow users to click on ‘Why was I shown this ad?’ to see the demographics pertaining to it, but still for many users this can be an uncomfortable invasion of one’s privacy. This issue is seen through media through topics such as ‘Big Brother’ and controversial government spying agencies, where one’s online life is always subject to scrutiny and the eyes of others. 

‘Fake News’ and ‘Clickbait’ can also be personalised and targeted by media and marketers, which can be troublesome in this online age where information spreads quickly, potentially causing harm if it is not accurate.

[fresherfury]

Participation Norms

Question Prompt: Complete one of the “norm-breaching” activities listed at https://socialmediacollective.org/2011/07/29/the-oversharer-and-other-social-mediaexperiments/ and write a blog post that describes the experience. Interpret your experience by mobilizing one or more of the week’s key concepts.

(THE OVERSHARER. Pick either an acquaintance you don’t know that well or a parent. In a 24 hour period dramatically increase the amount of information you send this person using a text-based mobile communication technology that you know they can receive (likeIM on your phone, text/SMS, or e-mail on your phone/PDA). For example, you could communicate with them every time you do anything (“hi I am getting on the bus”, “arrived in class,” “class is boring,” “having lunch,” “talking with friend.”) Describe the reactions.)

I have spoken to my mum only a handful of times since starting University. She is always quite busy and I forget to call so it’s not totally my fault… right? When I was given the chance to bombard her with messages about my day, I went wild. 

The communication I have with my mum is often limited but she does have a really good sense of humour so I was expecting an interesting reaction. I started off lightly with a gentle “Hi mum how are you” and ended abruptly with a “Ok I really need to pee now bYEEEE 👋”

Society has a certain set of rules on how to behave around other people. These socialised norms guide our behaviour in a social context. French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu calls these rules ‘Habitus’. Bombarding your mother with millions of messages is not normal Habitus.

The social context/field in this case is virtual, which means that it sometimes difficult to gauge what is proper or polite Habitus. My mum definitely did not expect me to send her so many messages as it was out of the ordinary and came across as a tad annoying. If I were to do this to a stranger, they might feel as much as uncomfortable or threatened.

Behaviours have been adopted online to ensure that online society runs as smoothly as possible. You don’t read a message that someone has sent you on Facebook then not reply as it comes across as rude and that person may assume you are angry or upset with them. When it is your friend’s birthday, you post a message on their Facebook wall. These behaviours or rules, although unwritten are generally adopted by most online users, and when these norms are breached often it is seen as anti-social. 

People who breach these online norms for fun or entertainment are called Trolls. It is not fully understood why people feel the need to breach these norms on purpose but Lifewire says that “(Online trolls) may feel depressed, attention-starved, angry, sad, jealous, narcissistic or some other emotion they may not be conscious of that's influencing their online behavior.” 

Trolls try and annoy people by breaking the peaceful habitus (normal internet conduct) that the social field (social media platforms) tries to uphold.

[fresherfury]

Self Management of Drag Queens on Social Media

Question Prompt: Pick a politician or celebrity and compare two of their social media platforms (e.g., Twitter, FB, LinkedIn, Instagram, Tumblr, Snapchat, etc). How does communication differ across these platforms? How might these differences relate to the platform’s “affordances”?

Drag queens have never been so conscious of management and publicity until social media has gained popularity. As a result of the extremely popular TV show Rupaul’s Drag Race, drag queens have become mainstream stars. Drag performers often manage themselves as drag doesn’t fit into any one particular agency; they aren’t exclusively models, nor are they all recording artists. 

While we have seen many queens suffer blows in popularity due to their behaviours on social media, many thrive by using different platforms to network and self-promote. The way these queens use social media is highly reflective of the affordances of these platforms.

The term ‘affordances’ in this context, is associated with the work of J.J Gibson and basically describes what different social media platforms have the ability to do, and how we use them. Twitter affords us to connect with celebrities, while also affording these celebrities to promote and connect to fans. 

An example in particular is drag queen Laila McQueen. She exited the competition very early on in Season 8 of Rupaul’s Drag Race but social media has the affordance for her to self promote on a variety of platforms, which has made her much more popular than expected. 

Laila uses Twitter to voice her opinion on drag culture, queer theory, politics and daily musings while she uses Instagram to self promote and keep a visual diary of her performances and important moments of her life. 

Twitter has the affordance of being able to quickly post statuses or thoughts (tweets) that quickly reach thousands of people. It also affords fans to reply, like or DM her about her thoughts. The communication can be compared to someone giving a speech, there is the person speaking and then the audience can respond positively (cheering, applaud etc.) or negatively (booing, throwing items, leaving etc.)

Instagram on the other hand is more interactive. It allows fans to track what Laila is doing, interact with her and Laila interact back. The affordances of Instagram combines the best of Snapchat and Twitter. Laila uses Instagram for business, as it has the affordance of being able to receive insights and analytics into the popularity of your posts, as well as control your comments and Direct Messages, which in invaluable to someone with over 160,000 followers. Instagram has the affordance of being able to reach a larger audience as the algorithm of the platform ensures more popular accounts are prioritised in followers’ feeds. Ian Hutchby says, “Affordances are functional in the sense that they are enabling, as well as constraining.” Instagram’s algorithm is enabling because it allows Laila McQueen to reach a larger audience but is also constraining because it is difficult for her to keep up with closer relationships with her fans. Twitter has the affordance of allowing her to do this.

[fresherfury]

‘Tag Yourself’: The Meme That Lets You Roast Yourself

Question Prompt: Browse through the Meme Database on knowyourmeme.com and pick a meme (either one you found there or one you were previously familiar with) and write a quick analysis of what the meme involves and the message it communicates.

Like most people, I enjoy a good meme. Bad Luck Brian or Doge never really did it for me so I had to really dive deep into the world of memes to get true meme satisfaction. In the most unlikeliest of places, hidden between Acai bowls and aspiring makeup artists, I found my niche. A niche that is self deprecating, weirdly specific and extremely relatable. 

Tag Yourself  memes originated on Tumblr in early 2016 but have since become a phenomenon on popular photo sharing app Instagram. Tag Yourself memes are identified by having generally six or so items, characters or aesthetics with “mislabeled names and heavily opinionated descriptions of their characteristics” (knowyourmeme.com) The viewer is then invited to ‘tag yourself’, identifying which option best describes them. It’s interactive, relatable and easy to replicate which means that it has a high level of virality and is extremely popular on all forms of social media. Although it might not make a whole lot of sense to my grandparents, I fully relate to Limor Shifman when she says “People use memes to simultaneously express both their uniqueness and their connectivity.”

I find it comforting when I find myself so perfectly summarised by a meme like this one created by @sk8rdad666 on Instagram. I myself, am Problematic. This summarises me perfectly. In fact, I just posted this on my Instagram story and have already started conversations about which one of my friends corresponds to each makeup item. It pokes fun at yourself for being a trope or a cliche, which we all try so hard to avoid. No matter how unique we think we are, there are at least 10 other people who will have the same exact reaction to this meme as I did. 

So, why don’t you tag yourself?