How media homogenized the college experience

Architecturally, the University of Michigan is unique. While we boast the uniqueness of our custom-crafted gothic Law Quadrangle or our modernist Ross School of Business, our campus and our students have lost the uniqueness that once characterized them.

Student movements and motions are now synchronized, and clothes and conversations appear algorithmic. This is not the natural flow of campus life. Intersecting cultures, beliefs, attitudes and displays of personality once decorated college spaces. However, in recent years, the pervasive influence of mass media has begun to strip us of our individuality. Its hold on students has been slow and deliberate, and it has proven to be terrifyingly effective.

In the past, college campuses were symbols of the region’s culture, thought and expression. The University of California, Berkeley is known for its fiery political attitudes that mirrored Northern California’s social engagement. In the same way, the University of Chicago is synonymous with intellectual rigor and curiosity in a preeminent creative hub.

Although these conventional images remain, the regional influence and distinctiveness of the college student body are lessening. Now, visiting these campuses will reveal that a sterile sameness has plagued each institution. Region-specific clubs like the American Indian Science and Engineering Society and activities are expanding nationally. University mission statements and plans are utilizing the same language and agendas. The culture at the University of Florida somewhat mirrors that of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign — and the media is to blame.

Ideological, region-based differences used to be embedded in the basis of each institution and were formative to the student experience. Regional differences allowed for students to find a place uniquely their own and to learn and grow in a new environment. Colleges represent the history, trials and trends that different areas of America have gone through. To promote a more diverse, interconnected adult population, the alumni of a given university should be living representations of that region and its history, even if they move far away post-graduation.

Despite the importance of tradition, college is also a time of transition and transformation. The exposure to new topics in and outside of the classroom aids in cognitive development, neuroplasticity, intellectual growth and self-efficacy. Additional years in an educational space also improves frontal lobe activity.

Though these changes are standard across universities, the rates and modes by which they occur could not be more different. Differences in these formative college developments lead to variations in how individuals develop, meaning that changes in these experiences result in distinct types of alumni with diverse skills, perspectives and approaches to their work.

Now, campuses reflect the content shown on our feeds more than they reflect the rich geographical and social histories of the regions they inhabit. Algorithmic media has handed students a curated ideal of college life and has overridden authenticity to do so. These algorithms are carefully calibrated formulas designed to keep user engagement high. They are architects of thought and prioritize what is most likely to provoke a reaction. The result? A stream of content that amplifies sameness.

Trends and lifestyles do not just have jurisdiction over our digital lives but over our real-life interactions. Even trending hot takes are just less socially acceptable thoughts that are shared by the masses. As humans, we are programmed to favor familiarity. The familiarity effect — a cognitive phenomenon that explains why humans favor familiarity over newness — also explains why we want our lives to be cyclical. If something has allowed us to succeed in the past, it will likely help us succeed in the future. Critical thinking, once a symbol of higher education, has given way to  replication. 

In this regression into sameness, the role of influencers is pertinent. They have become the curators of culture, dictating what students should wear, how they should act and what they should value. Evidence of this is subtle but sprinkled throughout campus life. Students are generally less inspired by local activists who are the backbones of campus movements or their professors who challenge them to rethink their worldview than they are by online influencers. Recent data indicates a decline in student participation with these traditional sources of inspiration. Student activism is now organized on and through media initiatives, with similar initiatives across multiple campuses. This is positive for wide-scale organizing efforts but reduces the opportunity for regional activism that could be key to tackling regional nuances or difficulties.

Even fashion has become homogenized. Historically, Northern and Southern schools have developed unique fashion as a result of regional and historical influences. As of late, even campus style has become standardized. Digital celebrities who push reused humor, attitudes and outfits are now idolized and copied. They promote lifestyles that feel aspirational but are unattainable and unoriginal.

Homogenous collegiate culture is not accidental. Powerful economic forces have crafted this conformity that is subtle and profitable. Industries have discovered that uniformity sells. It is easier to market to a student body and age group that all aim to dress the same, think the same and aspire to the same goals. The less deviation, the more streamlined the selling process is. 

Take Barstool Sports’ example. Instagram content among @barstooluofm, @barstoolohiostate, @barstoolindy, @tempebarstool and more all share similar sports content with occasional memes that relate to the college experience tailored to men. @ItGirl is an equivalent to Barstool but tailored to women. Similarly, popular universities all have Instagram accounts called “chicks” that publish meme content that somehow ties into their college. Yet, all posts are in the same format. @michiganchicks just published a meme cluster of Sabrina Carpenter kissing an alien with captions related to Michigan stereotypes. @msuchicks also posted the same format. These comparisons may seem redundant, but they paint a bigger picture of homogenized college culture.

The consequences of multicampus homogeneity reach far beyond mere shifts in fashion or lifestyle: They extend into the erosion of diverse dialogue and formative life experiences. Consuming the same content creates echoes of the same viewpoints and removes the space for genuine debate and exchange of ideas that used to occur naturally following graduation. This uniformity strips each college environment of the messiness that fosters progress. Consider how in American politics, the lack of diversity in perspectives has led to the development of two gridlocked political parties that dominate perspective and harbor influence. Similarly, on campuses, a lack of diverse voices has resulted in stagnant environments where unique perspectives are compromised.

The mental health toll is equally concerning. A consistent pressure to conform, to be liked and to be influential is breeding an anxious generation of students who struggle to find a sense of self and inner peace. This crisis is not just about social media, but about how we define success, worth and individuality in the age of digitization.

Some may argue that media has always influenced campus culture without drastic consequences. However, the rapid pace and targeted nature of our current algorithm-driven media have transformed campuses in an obvious way. What we see today is unnatural — it is a flattening of culture. Prior to the rise of algorithmic social media, the internet incited counter and subcultures. Now, with the advancement of technology, our phones can profit from our insecurities and self-proclaimed inadequacies. This push toward uniformity is swift and chillingly uncontested by consumers of media.

But, we can take steps to reverse this regression. On the university level, institutions must recognize their role in nurturing diversity of thought and expression. They must encourage spaces where student differences are celebrated and uplifted. Campus events, student organizations and courses must encourage engagement and prioritize learning history and the importance of representing a true version of oneself.

Unfortunately, the burden of change is mostly on us students. We must recognize and reclaim our rights to be different and resist the pull of digital conformity. We need to seriously question our consumption and analyze who we are listening to, why we are listening to them and what choices they are influencing us to make.

Simple as it may sound: Push back against the current in seemingly insignificant ways. Wear an outfit that isn’t trending but shows your personality. Start that discussion everyone is scared to have. Own yourself in a way that isn’t prescribed by an algorithm, but by your authentic self.

The significance of college has always been its ability to challenge and change us. As digitization pushes us toward uniformity, let us not forget the value of uniqueness in thought, expression and being that our collegiate region creates. Algorithms are powerful, but not invincible. Radically defy sameness to reclaim your individuality.

Rachelle Evans is an Opinion Analyst who writes about health care and wellness in American politics and culture. She can be reached at evansra@umich.edu.

Related articles