Now I'm part of a meta-online community.
I have only used social networking sites to spy on people-- to find names, to find out more about people I have just met. I also follow (but rarely contribute to) a discussion board about bicycling in the Twin Cities.
I find that much of what Baym discusses in relation to the R.a.t.s. site ten years ago still holds true-- for example, that “a small group of people does most of the performing.� (Interpreting Soap Opera, Creating Communities, p.105) I find this on the discussion board I frequent, and it seems like (as in real life) the people who talk the most tend to take control. Baym also refers to the "lurking" phenomenon (p. 108)-- It is still common to lurk on discussion boards or social networking sites, either by creating a nearly empty profile, or setting privacy controls so that no one can see it. Baym's remark that “R.a.t.s. participants are well-educated as in most of the Internet…most read newsgroups at work or at school� (p.105) really dates this piece of writing. Ten years ago, it was much less common to have a connection to the Internet at home. College students and people with computer-related jobs (presumably the most educated people) would have had much more control over online content, and I think the conversation has opened up a lot since then.
In “Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8�, Boyd tells us that “the number of people in one’s network was perceived as directly related to the number of friends one had.� I do think this is still the perception, at least among younger users. I agree with the idea that Top 8 is often wielded as a weapon; I’ve overheard kids talking worriedly about it, and I know of one local high school that has sent home a memo to parents asking them to monitor their children’s computer use, as a number of online disputes have led to fights during the school day. The other point I thought was particularly interesting was that “the users of social networking sites are faced with a conundrum, particularly those who must simultaneously interact with their peers and those who hold power over them.� The kids at my library would be mortified to know I’ve seen their Myspace profiles, full of booty pictures, amateur cussing and fake gangster posturing. Similarly, I couldn’t create an honest profile for myself without alienating some of the students I work with.
Comments
I found the last section of your post very interesting. The threshold of honesty for online communities. As someone who's a professional, there are definite conflicts of interest that could arise from online-social-networking. This says something about how true to life such a community can be.
Posted by: Andrew | February 18, 2007 10:36 PM