1

The Impact of Technology, Media, and Cultural Influence on Adolescent

Relationships

This is the second of four initiatives carried out in the overall scheme to assess peer-

reviewed scholarly articles for an exhaustive paper. The chosen article for this task, “What’s

wrong with me?”: Roles of time media and cultural influences on adolescent relationships by

Phukan (n.d.). The paper explores different aspects of the impact of media technology; social

culture and time linked to adolescent relations. Analyzing how these factors impact relational

dynamics, the article gives valuable lessons witch obstacles and possibilities technology brings

for youth at this sensitive stage of their development. This assignment is pertinent to the larger

goal of learning about the proper use of technology in research and coming up with sociological

viewpoints on relationships, marriages, and families. Based on the Symbolic Interactionism

theory, this paper analyzes the results of the article, discusses the existing bias, and suggests

directions for the further study of the adolescent relationships in the context of new media

environment.

It is evident from the current internet communication which holds that digital

communication has changed nearly every aspect of the relationships that adolescents adopt,

develop, and experience. Analyzing the described dynamics, Phukan focuses on the practical

aspects of time constraints and on the parts played by media and culture. Teenagers are

extremely pressed for time to perform tasks to their expectations social, academic, and extra-

curriculum commitments. These pressures often test the abilities of these workers to develop

healthy interpersonal relationships as they have little time for the requisite face-to-face

communion. Media, however, makes relational difficulties worse when in its contribution to
 2

partnering, it depicts platonic relationships as some sort of dream, a reality that is almost

impossible to attain. These portrayals foster a culture of low self-esteem amongst teenagers

likely to ask themselves whether their real lives are not as they see others portraying it on social

media. Moreover, they found that culture plays a major role in regulating young people’s

relationship behaviors and how they define satisfaction within partnership. Taken together, these

elements form a complex matrix that adolescents must navigate as they form and sustain

relationships.

Phukan’s the article’s findings can be better understood with reference to another

sociological theory: Symbolic Interactionism. As important features of this theory, symbols,

meaning, and self-concept are crucial to envisioning the relational encounter of adolescents. For

instance, digital communication technologies are viewed as severing important ritualized

functions within modern relationship wherein specific actions or behaviors are charged with

meaning. Constant texting or the usage of certain emojis, for instance, is a sign of togetherness,

while lack of it is perceived as lack of interest or arguing. These symbols however are not fixed;

they are constructed through an ongoing interactional process, an emergent [process] of

interpreting experiences about the signs and an annotation of social/cultural stories of community

cohesiveness. For example, while most adults understand that exchanging the passwords to

accounts in social networks is a more or less seductive sign of trust and closeness among

teenagers. However, it will be useful to emphasize that the importance of such behavior cannot

be regarded as universal and constant, and the meanings of such behaviors are socially

constructed.
 3

Another fundamental concept of symbolic interactionism is meaning-making and it is

also important to salvage because it helps to make sense of adolescent relationships. It means

that adolescents assign relational meanings to their interactions, based mostly influence of the

media and the culture in which they exist. Phukan’s article thus also discusses how such things

as media portrayals of perfectly good relationships create elevated set goals and expectations for

love. In general, adolescents absorb such narratives, which often they use to gauge the

effectiveness of their own interactions, or lack thereof, with their significant others based on

what they are presented with on the Internet. Meaning-making is therefore not an individualistic

process but a social one that is located within the culture and context of adolescents lives. For

instance, positive views on relationships tend to be promoted on the web frequently forcing teens

to display all the idealism that they consider necessary in their relationships despite the fact that

this is far from who they really are.

The third concept of symbolic interactionism is self-concept, we understand it to refer to

the image that the adolescent has for themselves in relation to their relationship with other people

in their lives, or particularly friends in this case, which impacts on adolescent relationships in the

digital age. Of the aforementioned platforms, SMs can be defined as the online sites where youth

build and manage the self and relationships. E-shocks say that teenagers maintain fake images of

their relationships on social media, in order to get a thumbs up from their friends. It is through

this process of self-presentation that not only do they start receiving feedback about themselves

from other people, but also have to start accepting those feedback in order to really know

themselves. Phukan’s article is a good example of how the described situation may end up in

both, positive and negative outcomes. On the one hand, social networks give students the chance

to share something and find friends. On the other hand, it can also impose the conformity to the
 4

societal norms prevalent online and worsen the feelings of inadequacy, especially if their online

representations do not reflect their offline reality.

However, there are certain biases that the author of the article failed to provide the

necessary credits to the Nepali literature. Of course, one of the most obvious biases is that the

negative impacts of both digital media and culture are highlighted more dramatically than other

factors; those being insecurity, and misunderstanding, and unrealistic expectations. Although

these threats cannot be underemailed, the article pays scant attention to the positive use of

technology in creating relationships. For instance, digital platforms can give the youth a chance

to be in touch with other people and share information that he or she might never be able to share

in his or her face-to-face conversations due to introvert status. As the article is mainly centered

around the problems, it is possible that reader will get an impression that the technology plays

solely negative role in adolescent relationships.

The other source of bias is the cultural context of the article, which predetermines the

English-speaking world’s worldview and is dominated by an orientation to relationships in

various cultures. For adolescents in non-Western cultures, the dynamics of media, time and

cultural demands may be entirely different, as well as the perception of these influences. For

example, while certain specificisms, such as texting patterns or social media activity, may have

different meanings in different cultures, transforming relational scripts in that culture. The

current cultural analysis also raises the question of an inclusive approach, looking at how

different adolescents are integrating relationship experiences into their contemporary globalized

world.
 5

However, another weakness in Phukan’s article is the usage of blasé evidence and biased

impressions… As such, despite of the remarks made, the reader may not be able to grasp the big

picture as it relates to adolescent relationship in the age of digital technology, and other

communication innovations. For example, the analysis of time and media influences, and culture

restraints and precursors are mostly given in qualitative descriptions in the article while the

subject can be further explored quantitatively. It should be noted that many of the evidences used

here are fairly subjective, which explains the need to introduce critical approach to analyze the

given findings.

Using the information presented in Phukan’s article as a basis for reflection, one of the

most promising directions for research is the overlap between the online and offline spheres in

teenage partnerships. However, future work can build upon how those young people navigate

these two worlds or how their digitally-mediated interactions inform or are informed by, their

‘real-world’ interactions and vice versa. This question fits perfectly especially given the growing

social interaction where the interaction is not well defined whether it happens on the internet or

in the physical realm. Studying this process, researchers will be able to find out more about the

contemporary teenage experience of relationships and the part played by digital technology in it.

Research examining the extent to which these adolescents have parallel and

complementary ways of relating face-to-face and virtually would clarify our understanding of the

attributes of contemporary adolescence and the maturity of adolescents’ relationships. For

example, knowing how adolescents best handle conflicts, show affection, or renew closeness

could enlighten researchers about the approaches adolescents have to engaging, avoiding, or

resolving conflicts. It could also help design specific preventive coping strategies that target

adolescent unhealthy relational ways, whether physical or virtual.

In conclusion, Phukan elaborates on time, media and cultural relations in adolescent love

proposing the opportunities and difficulties that technology delivers to this matter. From the

premise of SI, the conclusions obtained in the article are a representative portrayal of the tension

that exists functional symbols and construction of meanings associated with self-concept, and

how it affects the relational level. Although the article brings important ideas, its prejudices and

shortcomings show that more objective research providing comprehensive understanding of the

situation with adolescents in different cultures are relevant. These gaps alongside the emerging

phenomenon of confusion between online and offline relationships mean that future research

needs to fulfil the following objectives: Off course this approaches enhance and improve our

sociological understanding of technologies and relationships, more than this give a pragmatic

framework for intervention for adolescents as they pass through this sensitive developmental

phase.