Love is Dead and the Cameras are Rolling

Love has just died. Or, it’s been dead for quite awhile. Maybe it never even existed. Or maybe, love is alive and thriving in ways it never has before. It all depends on who you ask. And regardless of what the take on love may be, people are going to pay attention. TikTok user @mattyhaverty’s video poking fun at viral couples tests online included the line, “Love is dead and the cameras are rolling,” was no exception. The notion that social media and the ‘age of the influencer’ has smothered love under its barrage of ring lights and color-grading is both hopelessly depressing and somewhat comforting –no matter how cold the hand of this comfort may be. But has social media really killed love? 

The prompting of @mattyhaverty’s video comes from the ever-expanding amount of couples tests and challenges garnering millions of views on TikTok. This may be great news for those of you not sure if your partner really is the one. With just these simple tests it’s easier than ever to tell! There’s the orange peel theory, the olive theory, the line theory or the nail theory if you feel like getting philosophical. There’s also the ketchup challenge and the Beckham test if that’s more your speed. If none of those work, ask them to name a woman and see if it’s you. If you want to reaffirm your belief that you both are destined to be together, search for the invisible string that ties you together. Whatever you do, if you aren’t comfortable with thousands of people speculating and analyzing every word and movement do not in any capacity post it online.

At minimum, these trends are fun and garner views no matter if your partner “passes” the test or not– if view count is the goal it’s actually better if they fail. At most, the seductive promise that the trend along with thousands of eagle-eyed viewers will tell the tester everything they need to know about their relationship is too good to pass up. Testing your partner is not new. With millions of potential partners out there, the plaguing question “are they really the one?” has kept people testing one another for years. Despite the gimmicky quality the tests, mostly performed in heterosexual relationships by a woman testing her male partner, stem from very concrete desires or insecurities. According to the UN World Data women globally spend 2.8 more hours than men on unpaid care and domestic work, so the desire to use the various “challenges” to test their male counterparts' willingness to perform this labor makes sense. What’s changed is the introduction of a third-party viewer watching from the other side of the screen. 

Any aspect of life that a user publicly posts online is going to be subject to scrutiny. The anonymous user consuming these posts can now occupy the role of a judge, delivering their own verdict on if the posted relationship passes their own standard. A position many users happily take on, from the “if he wanted to, he would” preachers, the “never settle” advocates and the “red-flag” watch dogs. While these aren’t inherently bad reminders, has it gone too far? And how much does the opinion of thousands make an impact? Viral examples like “couch guy,” where a boyfriend sparked millions of unfound cheating rumors and internet hounding when filmed being both extremely unexcited and surrounded by other girls when his girlfriend surprised him, have worked their way into internet vernacular. It seems viewers now feel not only a secured right but a moral responsibility to analyze other users' relationships. The interaction between poster and consumer seems to go both ways. The user can consume the relationship content and pass a judgment but the posted relationship acting as the product consumed can also inform the user on what is and isn’t an acceptable relationship.  

When everyone can be an influencer and a product themselves – even unintentionally -- it’s difficult to exempt relationships and by extension “love” from this new era of marketing. Jean Baudrillard’s 1981 book “Simulacra and Simulation” discusses facets of this. Baudrillard’s argument is that of a hyper-reality in which a postmodern culture that is dominated by TV, film, the internet, and other media which where in the past solely simulation of reality have morphed in so they now aren’t any more or less “real” than the reality in which they simulate. The popular phrase, “art imitates life” has shifted so actually “art imitates other art” and “life imitates art.” The simulation and reality are morphing together much like the consumer and the product on Social Media. Common couple tropes like “black cat/golden retriever” no longer imitate real couples, but people strive to imitate the tropes. And as two people form a relationship posting it online is widely seen as an essential aspect of sealing the deal with the concepts of a “soft launch” or “hard launch” sneaking their way into regular vocabulary. 

A popular concept about love that has managed to withstand the test of time is, “love knows no bounds.” Despite the quotes transformation from poetic prose to Hallmark-card gimmick, it still manages to fill the self with hopeful sentiments about what love is; ever alive and unable to be contained by boundaries. But has Social Media's rapid evolution finally managed to do what seemed impossible? Has it been able to set boundaries on what millions of viewers consider to be love? It all depends on who you ask.  

Sources:
@mattyhaverty "love is dead"  
UN Data