Sunday, May 25, 2008

Virtual Communities: One Man's Trash is Another Man's Treasure

“….rather than understanding the Internet community as contributing to the decline of the social, we should better understand it as a response to that decline.” As written in Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam

This is a topic that truly interests me for many reasons. Studying about virtual communities is about understanding how the Internet has changed our lives for the better (or for worse, depending on your stand). It also meant studying about sociology, psychology and anthropology, fields that are so relatable for all of us.

The study of virtual communities has sparked many debates but one which is most prevalent is about whether online social networking has negatively impacted people’s social behaviour and interaction in the offline world. Many research studies have been carried out to test existing theories about how the Internet has been a cause of the decline in the traditional sense of community (shared space, close proximity, co-presence). For example, Nie and Erbring’s studies found that Internet users had less contact time with family and friends as they spent less time offline. However, many people who are the likes of journalist David Amis believe that ‘the Net is a communications technology which is in part shaped by the demands and needs of a more fragmented society. It is not responsible in and of itself for that fragmentation and isolation.’ (Read more about it – Does the Internet Make You Sad and Lonely)

There are also studies to defend the Internet and its alleged crime of causing negative social impacts in society. For example, the Pew Project results showed that Internet use, in fact, improves relationships especially strong ties and also increases the size of a user’s social circle. Furthermore, Robert Putnam (who wrote groundbreaking book called Bowling Alone shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and our democratic structures-- and how we may reconnect) points out that ‘voting, giving, trusting, meeting, visiting and so on had all begun to decline while Bill Gates was still in grade school’. He also suggests that rather than understanding the Internet community as contributing to the decline of the social, we should better understand it as a response to that decline.

So why do people socialise in cyberspace? Why do virtual communities exist? In general, people flock on the Internet to belong and find acceptance within groups of other people, perhaps with similar interests and values both locally or globally. Virtual communities exist because its users are social beings. Regardless how good or bad they are at it. The Internet is also a great avenue to escape the problems and issues of the real world. Additionally, on the Internet nobody knows you’re a ‘dog’. Socialising with anonymity or partial anonymity (does not apply to the WELL) has great advantages for some users. They may find it easier to gain acceptance when it is not based on their physical appearance, ethnicity, religious beliefs, social status, disabilities, etc.



Are online social butterflies as successful in their offline social worlds? Some onliners and their POVs:

Onliner #1

“…the people who are successful at social networks are the same ones who are great in offline networking.

Other than the fun value and some exclusive or niche networks (technology) all the other networks don’t add anything new to our life.

It’s a group of like minded people with like minded interests. The difference is there are no physical boundaries.”

Onliner #2

“From my personal experience, it seems that more online-social-networking people are bad at offline communication [or bad at hiding certain things that shouldn't be shown] than people who are not focusing on online social networking. There are people who are good, but not that many.

Also, regarding like minded people with like minded interests, I see many people interacting a lot when it comes to similar interests on places like MySpace or Facebook. However, majority of the people do nothing: they simply add each other based on interests, and then communication and interaction goes down from there.”

See what I mean? Fascinating! Another point that should be made is that virtual communities work for some and not for others. Not everyone finds socialising online fulfilling enough while some build really meaningful and lasting relationships with other virtual community members, as Howard Rheingold and other WELL members speak of the WELL. One man’s trash is truly another man’s treasure…

After doing all the readings, I personally feel that the Internet has more pros than cons and that virtual communities do not contribute to the decline of traditional communities. In fact, communities are transforming not disappearing. A lot of the online socialising that we do actually supplements our offline social behaviour and interactions. Many people who 'meet' online end up meeting in the 'real world' and many people who are unable to keep in touch with their close friends due to being geographically challenged can now do so thanks to virtual communities and online social networks such as Facebook. People haven't stopped going for chats over coffee or watching movies together at the cinema. In fact, thanks to the Internet the world is communicating even more than before - crossing many physical and social boundaries that society itself constructs. Today, communities are stronger and bigger than people could have ever imagined in the past.

No comments: