Yak About Yik Yak
As children we all remember sitting in a circle at lunchtime, whispering a crude message to a friend that was passed through a line of people until finally the last person announced the message to the entire group. We all remember snickering when, (a) our fellow friend announced the word ‘weiner’ or (b) when some pee-brain intentionally whispered the wrong message. The reason why I am reminiscing about the ancient game of Chinese whispers is not for nostalgia’s sake, but because that is the first thing that comes to mind when I think about the new social media app, Yik Yak.
Unlike Chinese whispers however, Yik Yak’s messages are transmitted anonymously to anyone within a 5-mile radius. In layman’s terms, if Twitter and Tinder had a baby, it would be Yik Yak. This is because it serves the same purpose as Twitter except, like Tinder; it only pulls tweets from people in the immediate area. Contrasting to its cousin, Chinese whispers, everyone is considered a pee-brain because the message being transmitted can be misinterpreted and shared out of context.
Like any app success story, Yik Yak was conjured in the college dorms of Furman University by two young fraternity brothers, Brooks Buffington and Tyler Doll. Since debuting in November 2013, Yik Yak has far exceeded its creators’ expectations and risen to the 16th most downloaded social netwo
rking app in the United States two years on
What I find most interesting about this app is not the potential issues that could arise — and some certainly have — but the fact that sharing anonymous thoughts, no matter how irrelevant or outright dumb they may sound, has a particular market appeal. Although, considering that the main purpose of social media is to share, sharing anonymously isn’t too far a stretch. Given that there are nearly 2.1 billion people active on social media, it is valid to assume that social media is very much a part of our lifestyle. Therefore, what does this indicate about the human condition in the digital age? More specifically, has the growing dependency and integration of social media into our personal lives hindered our growth as human beings? Or, has social media merely “updated” the way we grow emotionally and spiritually?
Key to this discussion is the humanist psychological theory proposed by Abraham Maslow in his paper, “A Theory of Human Motivation.” Often portrayed in the shape of a pyramid, Maslow suggested that there are five levels of needs. Essentially, a person cannot eventuate to the “next level” until the prior need is satisfied.
At the top of the hierarchy is self actualisation, or basically the nirvana for emotional intelligence. According to Maslow, self-actualisation represents growth of an individual toward fulfillment of the highest need; meaning in life. At risk of sounding more cliché, I am going to take it one step further and quote the humanist himself:
“What a man can be, he must be.”
Although Maslow’s hierarchy of needs made sense in the 1960’s with the advent of hippie culture and the idea that we should all “follow our bliss”, I think that this concept could have no grounding in the digital age. Well, at least not to the same extent that Maslow hypothesized.
Take for example the most basic need for human survival, food and water. Prior to the Internet, humans actually had to venture outside to discover new and interesting meals. Nowadays, all one has to do is scroll through the Instagram newsfeed. Ironically, research out of the Brigham Young University has found that looking at too many pictures of food can actually make it less enjoyable to eat. Researchers, Ryan Elder and Jeff Lasson, suggest that this is because looking at a picture of a meal before eating will reduce the sensory response. In this vein, the degree to which physiological needs are being satisfied in the modern day is subpar compared to when Maslow first posited his theory during the 1960s. Or, perhaps social media has added a new layer of gratification concerning physiological needs.
Self-actualisation in today’s society is much more complex than it was in past generations. We have increased freedom, and as such, more choices in our day-to-day lives than ever before. This is clearly illustrated by the sole purpose of Yik Yak where we have the freedom to [over] share.
Such access to information is changing the way we view ourselves and the way we identify. As Mark Deuze writes in ‘Media Life’ when people are able to read, edit and write experiences online, social media comes to shape our sense of reality. Moreover -
“This is a reality that seems malleable as well, that could be manipulated, fast-forwarded, panned, scanned and zoomed in on.”
Therefore, is it possible that social media provides all that is needed to become self-actualised? In theory, if safety and physiological needs are excluded from the equation, I think it is possible — especially when we assess the primary functions of Yik Yak apropos of Maslow’s theory. Users can contribute to the app by writing, responding and up-or-down voting ‘yaks.’ Already it becomes obvious that the users of Yik Yak are part of a wider community, albeit one that is anonymous, with a 5-mile boundary. In addition to being merely accepted and belonging, it is an innate want to be heard, to be appreciated, and respected. In a previous article I discussed the ‘liking’ function on Facebook to prove that ‘likes’ have become a validation mechanism and measurement of an individual’s success. The same can be said about Yik Yak’s feature of up-or –down voting ‘yaks.’ Just like Facebook, our esteem and ego is reliant on the number of votes our ‘yak’ receives.
“What a man can be, he must be” is the epicenter of self-actualisation. So if indeed social media apps like Yik Yak can lead man to become all that he can be, acting as platforms for belonging and esteem, what does that mean for the future? Is there a point beyond self-actualisation? Perhaps a reversion, whereby the flippant nature of social media can lead man to slip back down the pyramid, and enter a tomb of insecurity. Talk about food for thought!
