10. Relationship-tracking and changing intimacy (Samantha Teng)
While exploring intimacy in the digital age, Lambert studied how intimacy is mediated by relationship-tracking technology. It is important to note that definitions and development of intimacy is heavily contextualised as different cultural meanings exist and influence others in varied ways. In this case, he associates intimacy with caring and close relationships that form part of our lived experience. Relationship-tracking apps and programmes have risen in popularity on the heels of the self-tracking phenomenon. Lambert coins the increasing technologisation of creating social relationships as the âtechnicity of intimacyâ. Depending on how these technologies are utilised, different cultural techniques are evoked. In this article, Lambert argues that relationship-tracking as a product of the âtechnicity of intimacyâ cannot fulfil their promise of alleviating the labour of intimacy.
Focusing on the app, PplKpr, Lambert studies how this relationship-tracker and its following can create discourses about the impacts of relationship-tracking. By ranking the people one interacts with through a variety of moods and physical inputs, the app manages oneâs relationships and determines those worth keeping. The creation of such applications is based on our innate human obsession with self-improvement translated into our relationships. With its roots in psychotherapy, the app offers opportunities for the externalising of emotions in order to grow more fulfilling relationships. Since such technologies produce quick and convenient results, people seek such self-tracking devices for self-improvement.
Furthermore, relationship-trackers help to navigate âintensive intimacyâ, where intimacy becomes work that is hard to manage and requires learning specific sets of social skills. In contemporary societies with the proliferation of media, traditional spheres of intimacy are being transformed by new idea and beliefs, creating more complex meanings. As such, relationship-trackers jump in with objective algorithms and options that help to automate that process.
However, there are limitations to how much relationship-trackers can measure in social relationships due to the mysteries of intimacy. Invoking the concept of intimate presence, it is largely performative and based on social norms. When the media intervenes to a greater extent, media users need to be alert in multiple areas of presence. In the measurement of solely social encounters, relationship-trackers fall outside of intimate presence. Moreover, these trackers cannot measure the excess in intimacy. Using sensors restricts the full extent of intimacy as it only targets singular events while ignoring any other intersections of meanings or psychological factors. Hence, this limited scope of function signals users to the excess of intimacy which these systems cannot measure. Despite its limitations, Lambert asserts there is value in the development of relationship-tracking technology due to the emotional gain that dedicated self-trackers can achieve in their journey towards their goals.
The case study that Lambert brought up was an interesting one as it involved the maintenance of existing relationships as a form of convenience and self-improvement. In contrast to dating apps which can be said to encourage inorganic methods of finding relationships, this app seeks to build on those one already has to take on the burden of discerning the worth of each relationship. This reminds me of various apps tracking which accounts unfollow or follow you on different social media platforms. These apps would provide graphs charting oneâs follower growth or decline with suggestions on who to follow or unfollow. In the past, I remember downloading them for fun and curiosity. Though the app does not claim to manage oneâs relationships, it does measure the followers on oneâs social media accounts instead of having to individually scan through follower lists. This led to the change of my initial curious mindset to one that actively equated peopleâs worth to whether they unfollowed me or not. Looking back, I can understand how relationship-trackers do not capture the full image of social relationships as it only relies on statistics to inform one how to manage their social media accounts and in extension, their social lives. However, these numbers cannot understand why certain accounts followed or unfollowed you, leaving the excess of intimacy up for debate. Additionally, delegating control of relationships to an app such as PplKpr, which can automatically make changes to one's contact list, is an issue of agency in one's personal lives. With the intervention of such apps, intimacy is ultimately dictated by the app's own interpretations of the value of social relationships.















