Open-minded, independent, selfish, ambitious, progressive…the list of words used to describe Generation Z (Gen Z) goes on and on. The term Gen Z often crops up in discussions related to contemporaneous social issues. As heirs to the complex legacy of past generations and leaders who will lay the groundwork for a new future, Gen Z displays unique strengths and characteristics worthy of examination. In April’s issue, The Granite Tower (GT) discusses what differentiates Gen Z from previous generations, attempts to explain the purpose and limitations of categorizing generations, and suggests how society may move forward from unproductive discourse or practices surrounding generations and intergenerational conflict.
Gen Z refers to those who were born anywhere from the late 1990s to the early 2010s. They succeed the previous Generation Y, more commonly referred to as Millennials. Interestingly, South Korea has a separate term, Generation MZ, which combines both Generation Z and the Millennials as a single-generation cohort instead of separating the two. But the general characteristics of the American Gen Z and Korean Generation MZ are similar. Although Generation Alpha, those born after the early 2010s, is right on the heels of Gen Z, Gen Z is still currently the most influential youth generation.
What We Know of Gen Z
A defining characteristic of Gen Z is that they are the first generation of digital natives. A digital native refers to someone who grew up under the widespread influence of digital technology and devices. Naturally, they feel comfortable socializing, connecting with others, and researching using digital technology, switching readily between the offline and online worlds. Gen Z is accustomed to a world of hyperconnectivity and ubiquitous content and information. Furthermore, Professor Song Sujin (Global Business Administration) explains that members of Gen Z place more importance on individual identities and values. These characteristics differentiate Gen Z-ers from previous generations, who tend to share more communal values.
Gen Z has become a key target for firms and businesses, introducing new trends to the market with their digital versatility and heightened sense of individuality. Social media is an important part of the lives of Gen Z, with much of their interaction and communication shifting to various social media platforms. Professor Song explains that, following the transition from traditional media such as television and radio to new media, consumers are now less influenced by celebrities and authoritative figures. With social media successfully supplanting the dominance of traditional information disseminators, micro-influencers have risen as major influences in the market economy by constructing a brand of authenticity and parasocial intimacy with their followers, viewers, and subscribers. Professor Song further explains that social media platforms facilitate the creation of niche online communities where people with similar interests can interact with one another. This can also encourage the expansion of the boundaries of personal preferences, which consequently affects consumer behavior and leads to a more diversified and personalized market that is in accordance with the characteristics of Gen Z consumers.
Gen Z has also transformed conventional workplace culture. The popular Korean comedy show Saturday Night Live (SNL) Korea created a new segment titled “MZ Office” where actors and comedians parody Gen Z employees. The Gen Z workers in the show are depicted as selfish, lazy, and inconsiderate. For example, the show features a Gen Z worker who always plugs in her earphones when working and her co-worker who starts vlogging during work hours, along with a new applicant who cannot understand the context of the most basic Korean expressions. While some simply consider this hyperbolic comedy to be entertainment that also partly reflects reality, there has been criticism that these shows capitalize on and reproduce offensive stereotypes of this generation.
Beneath the humor and exaggeration of “MZ Office,” the show does manage to reflect some of the general tendencies of Gen Z workers. Gen Z is sometimes referred to as the most self-absorbed generation, presumably due to their prioritization of individual identity and values. In the United States (U.S.), Gen Z may engage in “quiet quitting,” which refers to the practice of doing the bare minimum of required work and never going above and beyond. According to a 2022 survey from Axios and Generation Lab, 82 percent of 828 Gen Z members answered that the idea of quiet quitting was “pretty appealing” or “extremely appealing.” In Korea, where vertical hierarchical structures are deeply entrenched in the workplace culture, the new generation may object to antiquated conventions that are discernibly unfair or inefficient. In contrast to previous generations, Gen Z imagines work as a separate realm external to their private lives, rejecting the more work-centered identity that older generations have cultivated.
Authenticity and Progressivism
Gen Z also finds deep meaning in authenticity and “being real.” According to a 2018 survey by consultancy Irregular Labs that examined 1,000 Gen Z-ers, 67 percent replied that “being true to their values and beliefs is cool.” Simply being flashy, popular, and visually pleasing is not enough; everything needs to have meaning. “Meaning Out” is becoming a new consumption trend, which refers to how individuals are expressing their individual values, preferences, tastes, and thoughts through consumption. Instead of simply making purchases based on cost-effectiveness and quality, Gen Z is also actively displaying their stances on various social issues such as climate change and environmental pollution. For example, according to a 2019 Forbes report “The State of Consumer Spending: Gen Z Shoppers Demand Sustainable Retail,” 62 percent of Gen Z respondents answered they would prefer to buy from sustainable brands.
In 2018, McKinsey, a global managing consulting firm, collaborated with Box1824, a research agency, on a survey that showed 70 percent of Gen Z respondents attempted to purchase products from companies they considered to be “ethical.” According to the same survey, Gen Z consumers have a greater interest in issues related to human rights, gender, and minorities. Diversity and inclusion are key values of Gen Z-ers, which is reflected in their consumption behavior. They not only expect high-quality products and services from businesses and brands but also have high expectations of their ethical standards and social awareness. Professor Song adds that the greater demand for corporate activism will accelerate the adoption of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) business management as firms become increasingly engaged with their social obligations.
Gen Z-ers themselves are also directly acting against injustice and actively engaging in various social issues. Historically, the most powerful revolutions have often been catalyzed by younger generations. According to a 2021 study by Edeleman, a public relations consultancy firm, 70 percent of nearly 10,000 Gen Z-ers were involved in some type of social or political cause. However, rather than participating in in-person protests and grassroots activism, Gen Z is quicker to respond and disseminate information in digital spaces. A 2020 study by the UK Internet Centre surveyed 2,001 respondents from 8- to 17-year-olds, and 34 percent felt that the internet inspired them to take action for a cause and 43 percent said that it made them feel like their voices matter more. Various social movements, including Black Lives Matter and School Strike for Climate, have demonstrated the impact of youth in invigorating social activism.
History of Generation Theory
As useful and ubiquitous as they are, generations remain a social construct. German sociologist Karl Mannheim was the first to devise the theory of generations, specifically arguing that the sociohistorical environment impacts the youth and produces a distinct social cohort, which was in contrast to the then widespread belief that it was the family unit that produced a socially distinguishable cohort. This theory helped explain the activism of American youth in the 1960s or the 1990s Korean student movement against the authoritative government of the time. Later, American scholars William Strauss and Neil Howe advanced this theory with their generational theory, which was specifically applied to American history and posits that historical events shape “generational personas.” However, like their academic predecessors, their idea of generations is very Western-centric and fails to consider the diversity of culture, social class, race, or ethnicity.
In Korea, various attempts to explain newly emerging social phenomena and attitudes via generation theory have emerged over the last three decades. Professor Yang Seunghoon (Kyungnam University, Sociology) explains that political, economic, and cultural generation theories have taken root in Korea during this time in such chronological order. Political generation theory was first to emerge with the 86th generation theory, which encompassed political activists who led student movements, while the term Idaenam, short for “men in their 20s” in Korean, is a more recent politically based term. Cultural generation theory refers to the unique culture that the new generation identifies with, such as the special “MZ-ness.” Finally, economic generation theory focuses on the attitudes of the new generation toward the neoliberal economy and recognizes economic disparities and injustices. One of the earliest examples of discourse on this theory was the “88 generation” of the late 2000s, with 88 referring to “880,000 won,” a then common pre-tax monthly salary.
Misrepresentation and the MZ Buzzword
The Gen Z label is often employed to refer to the entire youth population, creating the illusion of homogeneity within a very diverse group of people. Gen Z not only reflects the changing zeitgeist but at the same time, a mere minority of people who are able to support and represent these particular social attitudes and values. Not everyone can participate in mental health prioritization, body positivity, openness, and defining and expressing identities, nor are these supported everywhere.
For example, American Gen Z and Korean Gen Z are vastly different in their core interests and perspectives due to differing social landscapes. According to the “Gen Z Trend Report 2022” produced by the consumer data platform *Opensurvey*, American Gen Z has a greater collective interest in issues such as racism and workers’ rights, while Koreans are more interested in climate change and unemployment. The general image of young social activists in the U.S. is one of social media engagement and public activism on the streets for social justice. Within Korea, however, gender or workers’ rights tend to be downplayed in favor of a more general focus on unemployment in the job market, which is understandable due to the crippling state of youth employment in recent years. Similarly, both in the U.S. and Korea, quiet quitting and an ideal work–life balance remains a privilege that can only be afforded by those whose jobs do not determine their entire livelihoods.
This difference extends to the domestic level; according to the 2021 “Intensive Survey on Generational Awareness” conducted by the *Korean Broadcasting System* (KBS)’s *Korea Research*, Korean Gen Z are not as justice-oriented or progressive as they tend to be portrayed. For instance, in response to the statement "a big government is necessary for welfare,” people in their 50s stated that welfare and big government were necessary regardless of their wealth, whereas the responses of people in their 20s varied depending on their wealth— the wealthier they were, the less they thought that greater government support was needed. In terms of political beliefs, there is a widespread notion that the younger generation is more liberal, whereas the older generation tends to remain conservative; however, members of Korean youth are deeply divided on issues involving gender or the rights of minority groups, and intersectional divisions of interest are a more accurate depiction of these conflicts than is polarization.
According to Professor Yang, MZ generation theory has “a primary limitation in that it labels young people only as problematic beings and rests on a hasty generalization.” In general, the beliefs that the general public and media think Gen Z hold are in fact more accurately those of a subset of people who share the same political beliefs in the same online communities and those of students who attend prestigious colleges and aspire to get a job at a public/large company or to become a lawyer or doctor. Most of what the public knows of Gen Z is a greatly skewed representation of a privileged population of our youth. “Is Sohee, the main character of the 2023 movie Next Sohee, included in the MZ generation theory?” asks Professor Yang. “Can the voices of welders in their mid-20s who were born in Changwon who learn welding at a junior college and work as subcontractors at heavy industries be included in the [MZ] generation theory?”
As such, the observable “MZ” values of individualism and liberalism arise from a narrow minority demographic. In addition, this idea of separating people into generations is reflected in the way Korean society utilizes the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) or college majors as a proxy to determine the personality and disposition of an individual; these can be occasionally useful generalizations full of comical potential but they fail when used to separate individuals and groups characterized by different social circumstances or attempt to solve any real problems.
The Distortion in Intergenerational Conflict
The generational conflict between the kkondaes, a reference to middle-aged people whose authoritative streak and vain pride in their status as older and wiser has generated scorn among the younger generation, and the newest MZ Generation has now become embedded in modern culture. But this supposed conflict is not as genuine as it seems, with news and social media overemphasizing the friction between the generations. Although the clash of different values is natural as society progresses, the common Korean perception of generational conflict is partly a consequence of lazy journalism.
Professor Kim Sua (Seoul National University, Communication) of the Korea Press Foundation argues in her 2023 article “We must refrain from the mass production of the hastily generalized picture of conflict,” with the news media a major contributor in fueling the stereotype of the Korean MZ Generation, creating a buzzword that appears to be a valid sociological construct but is rather a media tactic and marketing strategy to gain more attention, ultimately sending a misleading message about the generational conflict.
Many media outlets depict the older generation as evil, portraying them as kkondae, while labeling the MZ Generation “selfish” or “irresponsible” when it suits. Kim explains that, according to a 2022 paper published by the Korea Press Foundation, titled “Study on the Status of Reports and Improvement Measures Related to Generational Conflict,” Korean journalists have been overly reliant on online communities and social media posts instead of pursuing authentic sources, which, as Kim’s research of Korean news articles reveals, has led to the mass production of articles with titles such as “I Hate Work Dinners” (Chosun Ilbo, 2021.11.5), and the use of language that magnifies conflict or frustration between the older and younger generations.
The discourse around intergenerational conflict/inequality produced by the media and circulated in society is a gross oversimplification of the more real, complicated structural inequalities that plague Korean society. According to 2022 Korea Democracy Foundation (KDF) report titled “Frames of Generational and Gender Conflict and the Reality of Inequality in Korean Society” by Shin Jin-wook (ChungAng University, Sociology), the frame of “intergenerational inequality,” namely the common rivalry frame, older generation that monopolizes resources vs. younger generation that falls victim “narrows the space for language and thought that could actually diagnose and respond to the more essential problems of inequality within all generations and the transfer of wealth between generations.” A more productive social discourse, therefore, would replace the current blame game on certain generations and instead spotlight truths that lie beneath what is immediately visible.
Seeing Eye-to-Eye
Generational conflict is nothing new; it has always been challenging for different generations to see eye-to-eye with one another. Even ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates complained about the younger generation, pointing out that “the children now love luxury; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.” According to a 2019 study by John Protzko and Jonathan Schooler of the University of California, Santa Barbara, people have a natural tendency to believe in “generational decline,” deeming the younger generation deficient in intellectual abilities or respect toward elders. The researchers explain that this is because people are more likely to recognize the limitations of others in areas that they excel in themselves and because they have a biased view of the past.
However, members of the younger generation often successfully identify what went wrong and take action to improve the future. Following the continuous development of technology and increased awareness of both the world surrounding them and the values that they keep close at heart, the world is witnessing a gradual large-scale improvement in politics, society, and culture due to generational progression. Members of Gen Z actively encourage and contribute to the creation of a society that values diversity, inclusivity, and equity; however, most importantly, it should not just be Gen Z but rather the collective human drive toward progress that unites us all.