Kim and Kim (2023) study how temporary content on social media affects users. They focus on platforms like Instagram Stories and Snapchat, where posts disappear after a short time. The authors explain that these formats change how people communicate online. Because the content is not permanent, users often feel less pressure when they share posts. They may upload more casual photos or everyday moments. At the same time, users still see many carefully curated images from others on these platforms.
The study shows that even short-lived posts can influence how people see themselves. When users watch many images from others, they may compare their appearance or lifestyle with those posts. This can lead to concerns about self-esteem and body image. So even though the content disappears, its effects can remain in people’s thoughts. This connects to the idea of temporality in digital media. Ephemeral media disappears quickly, but the social and psychological impact can last longer. For me, this reading changed how I think about disappearing media. I used to think it only meant temporary content. Now I see that it also shapes how people present themselves and interact with others online.
What stood out to me in your post was your point that disappearing media should not be understood as low-impact media. I really agree with that, and I think the module readings help explain why. Kim and Kim show that even when content is short-lived, it can still shape self-comparison, self-esteem, and body image. That is what makes ephemeral media so interesting to me. Its duration is brief, but its effects are not. In that sense, temporality does not reduce influence. If anything, it changes the way influence works.
ReplyDeleteYour post also made me think more carefully about the contradiction built into platforms like Instagram Stories and Snapchat. On the surface, they seem to encourage casual and spontaneous sharing because posts are not meant to stay visible forever. However, the temporary format may actually heighten attention rather than reduce it. Because users know content will disappear soon, they may watch more closely and feel a stronger pressure not to miss what others are showing. So while ephemeral media appears less permanent, it can still produce very real social pressure, especially around lifestyle, appearance, and belonging.
I also think this connects well to the module’s ethical questions. The platform gives users a feeling of safety through disappearance, yet that feeling is unstable. Screenshots, reposts, and memory all complicate the idea that the content is ever fully gone. This is where Barneau and colleagues’ focus on information processing also feels relevant. Even if a post disappears from the screen, it may continue to shape how users interpret themselves and others afterward. So maybe ephemerality is not just about media that vanishes, but about media that makes permanence feel temporarily invisible. That tension is what made your post especially compelling to me.