Within the past century, various technological advancements have made their impressions on communities all over the world, but the advancement that seems to have stimulated the greatest impact in today’s global society is the digital camera. Constructed in 1975 by Steven Sasson, the digital camera has been utilized as a stand alone product, within cell phones, watch towers, police cars, and in many other industries (“Who Invented the Digital Camera”). The digital camera has managed to reshape the modern culture of the United States significantly, thus its influence on our capitalist values can best be analyzed through a sociological mindset. Although the effects of the usage of digital cameras in our society can be explained by a structural
…show more content…
Under the Marxist viewpoint, the digital camera has led to a greater divide between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in our society. Around the time of the digital camera’s inception, wealthier individuals had access to higher quality cameras which often times produced clearer images with more vibrant color. In contrast, the average member of the middle class or any individual in a more unfortunate economic situation, was not exposed to the same nuances and novelty of the digital camera. As a result of this disparity, the members of the bourgeoisie were able to communicate their experiences, ideas, and memories more effectively amongst their communities thus improving their own sociological status. A hierarchy of this type is arguably not good for any society, so in essence the creation of the digital camera proves to be a detriment to the standard of equality in the United States and in other capitalist countries. Structural functionalists, however, would argue that digital cameras accomplished the opposite …show more content…
Digital cameras produce digital media, and this byproduct has led to a wave of innovation in recent decades that society has tag-lined “social media”. A popular social media platform, Instagram, has found a way to take digital media and attribute value to it based upon the opinions and feelings of other people. By definition, commodity fetishism gives meaning to items based upon arbitrary value, therefore the institution that Instagram and digital cameras have created is a form of commodity fetishism (“Commodity Fetishism”, October 5th). According to Marxist principles, commodity fetishism dehumanizes people because individuals are no longer attributing their own value to their pictures, instead symbolic hearts, or “likes”, are in control of the way the public perceives the worth of someone’s cherished memory. Marxists also believe that the principles in a capitalistic society alienate individuals from themselves (“Critique of Capitalism”, September 30th). If critiqued based upon the claims of this belief, the digital camera would be seen as a tool that alienates humans from themselves because of the narcissistic manner in which our society utilizes pictures. Our society takes pictures of ourselves, “selfies”, in an effort to seek approval from others. In a sense, people who partake in this practice are alienating
Under the Marxist viewpoint, the digital camera has led to a greater divide between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in our society. Around the time of the digital camera’s inception, wealthier individuals had access to higher quality cameras which often times produced clearer images with more vibrant color. In contrast, the average member of the middle class or any individual in a more unfortunate economic situation, was not exposed to the same nuances and novelty of the digital camera. As a result of this disparity, the members of the bourgeoisie were able to communicate their experiences, ideas, and memories more effectively amongst their communities thus improving their own sociological status. A hierarchy of this type is arguably not good for any society, so in essence the creation of the digital camera proves to be a detriment to the standard of equality in the United States and in other capitalist countries. Structural functionalists, however, would argue that digital cameras accomplished the opposite …show more content…
Digital cameras produce digital media, and this byproduct has led to a wave of innovation in recent decades that society has tag-lined “social media”. A popular social media platform, Instagram, has found a way to take digital media and attribute value to it based upon the opinions and feelings of other people. By definition, commodity fetishism gives meaning to items based upon arbitrary value, therefore the institution that Instagram and digital cameras have created is a form of commodity fetishism (“Commodity Fetishism”, October 5th). According to Marxist principles, commodity fetishism dehumanizes people because individuals are no longer attributing their own value to their pictures, instead symbolic hearts, or “likes”, are in control of the way the public perceives the worth of someone’s cherished memory. Marxists also believe that the principles in a capitalistic society alienate individuals from themselves (“Critique of Capitalism”, September 30th). If critiqued based upon the claims of this belief, the digital camera would be seen as a tool that alienates humans from themselves because of the narcissistic manner in which our society utilizes pictures. Our society takes pictures of ourselves, “selfies”, in an effort to seek approval from others. In a sense, people who partake in this practice are alienating