My video takes a branch from the topic labelled ‘Sexing up
New Media: From Online Dating to Porn’. Whilst I found the topic quite
interesting, I thought it may be difficult to produce a video on online
pornography and sexuality as people find the issue quite controversial and
difficult to talk about. Instead, I focussed on the notion of online relationships.
Not in the typical sense of people who have met online, but rather exploring
how couples (regardless of how they have met) use social media and technology
throughout their relationships. I truly believe this topic is highly relevant,
and not always completely noted when discussing online behaviour.
I chose to create my own video and image content whilst
filming this video, rather than reusing material online. In order to do this, I
created a script of the scholarly information I needed to include, and my own
personal opinions on the topic I have chosen. Following this, I highlighted
sections that may be easily enhanced with video footage and scripted scenes that
would suit them. I also captured a few screenshots relevant to certain sections
of footage. I included music that was listed on the ‘Free Music Archive’
website to ensure it was safe to use.
I chose to reference the 2011 Waskul reading, ‘The New
Sexuality Studies’ in my video as that was the initial reading that sparked my
interest in this topic. I took notes, particularly on the concept of cheating
online, and formed a document referencing interesting material and quotes. I
also scanned through a few different chapters in the same book to broaden my
understanding of sexuality in the internet era. I found this better supported
my knowledge when explaining what my video was about to friends, before asking
them if they would like to be involved. Before the reading I had a very
simplistic, un-revised concept of what I considered cheating. It occurred to me
that proceeding the reading that the concept is far more complicated then I
imagined.
My second reading was by Couch and Liamputtong, titled 'What
are the real and perceived risks and dangers of online dating? Perspectives
from online daters'. There were a few key points I considered when talking
about online dating specifically, and how it is more common and less
marginalised with the increasing use of technology. These key points informed
my opinions about the dating app, Tinder.
The last reading I found was the reading I discovered was
the most relevant to my argument. The book titled ‘Love Online: Emotions On The
Internet’ by Ben-Ze’ev explored how online relationships are indeed conducted
by actual flesh and blood people. It explored how prominent the online world is
in affecting our own realities. As I suggest in my video, and as a
generalisation, people’s offline relationships are highly influenced by their
online relationships, with their behaviour leading to both deeper emotions for
a partner or more paranoia and distrust in them.
Whilst the assignment was extremely engaging, there were
challenges along the way. Before commencing the making of my video, I created a
timeline of when I would work on certain areas and film specific scenes. I was
initially very determined by the vision of what my video would be and the
timeline that I would get it done by. However I found relying on people to
follow through with allocated filming times quite difficult. Although this was
frustrating, I persisted to create my own content and am happy with the final
result. A further challenge was using a video editing program I had not used
before. However, with the help of YouTube tutorials and multiple tabs from the
program website, I easily grasped the editing tools to produce the content I
needed.
Bibliography:
Waskul, DD, 2011, ‘Internet sex: the seductive “freedom
to”’, in Seidman, S and Meeks, C (eds.), Introducing the New Sexuality Studies,
Routledge, Abingdon and New York, pp. 364-70
Couch, D, Liamputtong, P, & Pitts, M 2012, 'What are the
real and perceived risks and dangers of online dating? Perspectives from online
daters', Health, Risk & Society, 14, 7/8, pp. 697-714, Business Source
Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 31 August 2014.
Ben-Ze’ev, A, 2003, Love Online: Emotions On The Internet,
Cambridge University Press, New York,
EBSCOhost, viewed 31 August 2014.
Social
mediums act as platforms of self-expression, self-reflection and identity
construction. The nature of social media requires users to consciously, visibly
and deliberately perform their identity, whatever they imagine that to be (Gabriel,
F, 2014, p104). As argued by Gilpin (2010, p233), “identity construction” can
be seen as a “sense-making process by which people selectively organize their
experiences into a coherent sense of self” (Kimmons, R, 2014, p94). In my own
experience of witnessing online behaviour, this ‘coherent sense of self’ is
reflective not of a person’s realisation of their own identity, but by the identity
they desire to possess.
Social
media has inevitably lent users the power to transform, project and alter their
identity. Generally, people choose to promote the most exciting, adventurous
and admirable things they have done on social media to maintain a certain image
of themselves. Everyone is guilty of sensationalising their profile to
proliferate the highlights of their life. I know myself am a culprit. My
online life consists of albums of photos from recent holidays, from parties and
formal events, from my impulsive decisions to go ice skating or sky diving. These
photos may imply my personality is spontaneous (when in reality, I plan my
day’s to the minute), adventurous (which is exactly me!…unless it’s cold, or
too hot. Or there’s something better on TV), professional (Can someone please
just pass the vodka?!), and sociable (who wants to talk to people when you can spend
time with your dog?). This construction of my online identity is a compilation
of photos, of check in’s at fancy café’s, and status’ claiming how good it
feels to be standing on the Eiffel Tower. Posting photos of highlights in my
life implies a certain lifestyle, and personality others may assume I have. What
lacks in my online identity is what I spend most my life doing…work, studying,
and sending snap chats of my dog.
The difference between online and offline identity
While
I use my profile as a fun way to annoy people with photos, brag about my
sandwiches, and tag friends in videos of people falling off things, my
boyfriend uses his for very different purposes. Matt is a personal trainer, and
in order to maintain his reputation and credibility, he avoids posting of
himself eating junk food, or drinking alcohol. Many of his posts are work
related, promoting the weight lifting classes he runs, and the successes of his
clients. Matt’s online presentation is motivated by his profession, and surely
heightens his passion for fitness and health. When, in reality, he can inhale a
Parma and pot in the time it takes me to pick up my fork. But his clients don’t
need to know that…
As
I have described with two personal examples, people use social media for a
number of different reasons and in a number of varying ways. What is concerning
is that the rise of reliance and time spent on social media, users are becoming
more exposed to images of celebrities, of their peers and of advertising that
has led to a more sexualised culture. Young people are growing up in an
increasingly sexualised world driven by technology (Walker, S, Sanci, L, Temple-Smith, M, 2013, p8). They are turning to social media to
represent their own coming of age processes, and are negotiating and developing
their identities through these platforms (Gabriel, F, 2014, p106). I notice
this witnessing the online behaviour of younger cousins and family, who dress
years beyond their age. Wasn’t I in matching tracksuits at 12?
Consider
the use of Instagram to explore this theory. Admittedly, I follow a lot of my
favourite actors and singers on Instagram, like most users out there. Whilst it
seems like a little harmless insight into the life of a well-known celebrity,
there seems to be obvious consequences for following these high-profile stars,
particularly in the modern pop industries. For example, it’s been very hard for
me to cope with the fact that I will never have Beyoncé’s wardrobe, or her
booty. Humans tend to judge, compare, and wallow in our own self-pity by the
fact that we’re not a size 6, because every single celebrity we follow on
Instagram is. It’s dangerous, and is leading to more and more pressure for people
to fit into a narrow band of beauty (Gabriel, F, 2014, p105).
Furthermore,
the age by which people are becoming involved in virtual worlds is becoming
younger and younger. Social media engagement is particularly harmful to young
people in the process of self-development and can create a completely different
context for an individual to grow and mature (Gabriel, F, 2014, p106). Research
by Laurence Steinberg (2008) has revealed that during adolescence, the brain’s
‘socio-emotional’ systems mature faster than the ‘cognitive-control’ systems.
This imbalance means that teens make decisions and process information in a way
that is more likely to emphasise emotional or social reward over potential risk
(Gabriel, F, 2014, p105). Impressionable minds are vulnerable to sexualised
images of their ‘role models’, and therefore may feel pressure to fulfil some
sort of performative gender stereotype. Women, in particular, are predominantly
portrayed as sexual beings in the media, in advertisements, in music and in
movies. Therefore, a young woman’s motivation to adhere to these standards may
post sexualised images of themselves on social media, not considering the
consequences if a potential employer, or worse, their DAD, came across them
online.
Indeed,
digital culture is becoming increasingly pervasive and embedded in young
people’s everyday experiences (Weber, Dixon, 2010) (Walker, S, Sanci, L, Temple-Smith, M, 2013, p8). It is controlling much of how they see
themselves, and the world around them. There is a blurring distinction between
ones online and offline identity, and can be detrimental to ones sense of self,
and self-esteem. People’s online identity is their own to create, however, when
motivation is based on reputation, belonging, and attention, rather than
expression, I’d suggest a reconstruction. Thanks for reading. I’d stay and chat
but I must be off to my equestrian race now.
Bibliography
Walker,
S, Sanci, L, Temple-Smith, M, 2013, Sexting and young people: Experts’ views.Youth Studies Australia, 30, no4, retrieved August 1st
2014, http://journals.sfu.ca/ysa/index.php/YSA/article/viewFile/129/145
Thomas, A, 2008,
Youth Online: Identity And Literacy in
The Digital Age, Peter Lang Publishing, EBSCOhost, New York
Kimmons, R,
2014, ‘Social Networking Sites, Literacy and the Authentic Identity Problem’, Techtrends: Linking Research & Practise
To Improve Learning, 58, 2, pp. 93-98, Education Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 July 2014
Gabriel, F,
2014, ‘Sexting, selfies and self-harm: young people, social media and the
performance of self-development’, Media
International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, 151, p104, Literature
Resource Center, EBSCOhost, retrieved
30 July 2014
Can
you imagine a world without Facebook? What did we do with our lives before it? In
our modern technologized media culture, Facebook and other social networking
sites alike have become a core competent of our participation in both our
online worlds and our external environment and has ultimately created a sphere
for which we can control our identities. Social
networking sites are defined as applications that enable users to connect with
others by creating personal information profiles whilst inviting friends and
colleagues to have access to those profiles (Kaplan, A, Haenlein, M,
2011). These personal profiles can include a
variety of information, including text, photos, videos, audio files, and blogs
that people freely and willingly update and contribute to. It seems that
nowadays, internet users are happy to publicly proliferate information about themselves,
whether it be a truthful, indicative information of their actual selves or not.
Ultimately, social media acts as medium for people to construct, manipulate and
alter their identities in a simple, almost uncontested, manner.
Traditionally,
identity may have been seen as a combination of elements of our personalities,
both innate and developed. Genetics, nationality, ethnicity, and environment
were and are features that can be perceived as composing our identity. However,
with the growth and ubiquity of social media, identity has become something
quite comparative. A number of scholars have resulted that identity has become
a significant reflection of the self-concept. As defined by Rosenberg (1986),
Self-concept is “the totality of a person’s thoughts and feelings in reference
to oneself as an object”. Identity, on the other hand, is that part of the self
‘‘by which we are known to others” (Altheide, 2000, p. 2) (Zhao, S, Grasmuck,
S, 2008). Judith Butler
(1999) says identity is a performance of fantasy and desire; a pursuit of being
and becoming the image of this desire
(Thomas, A, 2007). The construction of an identity is therefore a public
process that involves both the claims by the individual about their own
identity and the identity constructed by others who endorse the claimed
identity (Stone, 1981, p. 188).
Raessens
(2005) describes two key terms that are useful in allowing us to understand the
cultural shifts that were initiated by the Facebook phenomenon that have
altered the way identity is formed and maintained. Michael Heim described
virtual reality as “an event or entity that is real in effect but not in fact”
(Raessens, J, 2005). The virtual space by which we create our identity is real
in effect, as it reflects who we desire to be, however, in fact, is not a true
representation of the self. Severe reliance and ‘addiction’ into this virtual space
can lead individuals into deep immersion in a pseudo-world, impacting their
perception of social, language and cultural norms.
Raessens
(2005) describes the process of interactivity, which explores how modern
internet users can control their cyber space in a way that is meaningful to
them. Through the example of Andrew Cameron, Rassens (2005) identifies interactivity
as “the ability to intervene in a meaningful way within the representation
itself”. This is particularly relevant
in terms of the individual’s ability to intervene with online content in order
to represent themselves in a certain manner. The construction of online profiles
enables people to hide their undesired physical features, and anonymity allows
individuals to re-create their biography and personality. In other words, the “disembodied
and anonymous online environment makes it possible for people to reinvent
themselves through the production of new identities” (Zhao, S, Grasmuck, S,
2008). On Facebook, we can easily alter our identities depending on the photos
we post, status’ we write and the people we connect with. The deletion of
unflattering photos marks the beginning of censoring our profiles and hiding
elements of our identity to suit our preferences. Instead of keeping these
unappealing photos on their walls, users are inclined to post exciting,
flattering, flawless looking photos in order to impress their followers. In
essence, we proliferate an image of who we want others to perceive us as, and
who we desire to be, whether through photos or text. One user may constantly
post photos of themselves clubbing, drinking and dancing in order to present
themselves to their cyber network as a party person. Another may tag themselves
as “going for a 30km run” or “At the gym lifting 200kg weights…with one hand.” in
the hope for recognition as a fitness fanatic. Although, they may choose not to
tag themselves as “Scoffing down a Big Mac after exhausting myself after that marathon”
in order to maintain a certain reputation. Either way, both examples explore
how our identities are a construction of the information we choose to expose and
omit to our wider, online community.
The identity claims we present on Facebook can be
both implicit and explicit. Most implicit identity claims are visual, involving
the display of photos and pictures uploaded by the users themselves (Zhao, S,
Grasmuck, S, 2008). While they do not overtly claim the personality of an
individual, photos imply elements of a personality. Admittedly, when one of my
friends post that they are “In a relationship with….” a new person, I instantly
have a quick stalk to see what they ‘are like’. Although I don’t read anything that
their new beau writes, I may scroll through a few photos and draw assumptions
about what kind of person they might be. Because really, I can decipher an
entire person’s life by looking at two public profile pictures. I see one photo
of them hugging their dog? Ah, clearly he must be a playful, loyal vegetarian
with a restless attitude who likes the outdoors, and is quite the affectionate
type who’ll text you at least 5 times a day, but will always act manly in front
of his mates to maintain his male bravado. He also won’t be pleased that you
have a cat, but don’t worry…he’s too afraid of losing you to ever tell you.
Research conducted by
Zhao and Grasmuck (2008) shows the number of profile pictures displayed by users
ranged from 2 to 399, averaging 88.4 (median = 63.5) photos per user. The
number of users who displayed their profile photos and wall posts to their cyber
network ranged from 90.5% to 95.2%. By showing images without explicit
description, Facebook users sought to make certain implicit identity claims
aimed at generating desired impressions on their viewers especially in terms of
the depth and extent of their social ties (Zhao, S, Grasmuck, S, 2008). Comparatively,
explicit claims involve users’ verbal descriptions of themselves, both
enumerated around interests, pages they “like” and preferences as well as
narrated descriptions of self (Zhao, S, Grasmuck, S, 2008). Marshall (2010) perceives this constant exposure and interest
in each other’s lives as an indication of a well-developed specular economy
whose foundations are derived from the much longer tradition of celebrity
culture and whose repercussions relate to an emerging comfortability with a
society of surveillance. As much as it may seem surreal, privacy is not as
valued as it has previously been. We have become accustomed to broadcasting our
intimate lives and becoming involved in trivial matters in other peoples
(Bentley, P, 2011).
The way people
manipulate their identities on Facebook is similar to that of those who create
an online dating profile. Research conducted on people’s profiles on Internet dating sites showed that the identities that
were produced differed from the identities produced in face-to-face situations,
because people on the Internet dating sites tended to ‘‘stretch the truth a
bit” (Yurchisin et al., 2005, p. 742) in their online self-presentations (Zhao,
S, Grasmuck, S, 2008). Obvious as it may seem, this process of “stretching the
truth” may be seen as more or less acceptable as identity claims made on
Facebook. On dating websites, you are representing yourself to a variety of
strangers (rather than a network of people you are probably already acquainted
with as on Facebook). Therefore, their identity claims may be more accepted as
truth. By that note, if an individual was to venture out and meet someone they
have connected with via a dating website, the other person will be quick to
discover their date is not the tall, blonde, gym-junkie they expected. So is
allowing users to have the freedom to post whatever content they want an advantage
or a detriment to creating an identity and constructing a self-concept?
Whether
an advantage or a disadvantage, virtual social
worlds, such as Facebook, Twitter, and online games, give inhabitants the
freedom to choose their behaviour and essentially live a virtual life beyond their
real life (Kaplan, A, Haenlein, M, 2011).
The Second Life application is a prime example of this. The game allows the
player to do mostly everything that is possible in daily, physical life such
speaking to other avatars, taking a walk, relaxing in the garden. The user
creates an avatar that represents themselves in this alternate universe. The visual content and graphics of the game is
intended to immerse the player in a computer-generated reality, alluding them
to a sense of escapism from their own actual environment. They become focused
on the senses they are experiencing in their ‘Second Life’, and become
habituated to outside noises (Kaplan, A, Haenlein, M, 2011), ultimately
suggesting their descent into a virtual reality. Their identity, therefore,
becomes manifest in their avatar. Like the desired self one presents on
Facebook, a person’s avatar may withhold they characteristics they crave to
have. Luscious hair, an ideal figure, a particular fashion sense. Becoming absorbed
in the character is an indication of submission into another identity. One that
is affirmed by virtual friends, who accept the avatar for who or what it is,
unable to judge the physical person beyond the screen.
The construction and proliferation of identity through the means of
social mediums are not necessarily all false claims with negative implications. The
practise of blogging is a particularly prevalent mode of communication in our
modern, Western society, and has created a community culture in a world beyond
our physical space. The content of blogs typically reflects what is expected to
impact the writer’s life, such as school, intimate relationships, sexual
identity, personal interests, music, politics and others (Huffaker, D, 2004). According
to Lim (2012), blogs have become a vehicle to produce a new communication
sphere, allowing individuals to broadcast their own social and political
commentaries and to build networks of individuals of similar interests. As an
example, three cyber communities met in a face-to-face event in July 2006 that
served as a gathering for like-minded Indonesian Muslim’s to discuss the
importance of cyberspace and the blogosphere. The rapid expansion of the
Internet enabled these Muslim groups to engage globally with a community of
like-minded individuals who have a cultural understanding of each other (Lim,
M, 2012). Cyber communities can be therefore seen as contributing to a wider
senses of belonging and cements a sense of identity, which can greatly enhance
to ones sense of well-being.
The
cyber world is becoming a vehicle for individuals to create a sense of
identity, whether it be truthful and indicative of their actual selves. While
this may be seen as misleading a deceptive behaviour, our freedom to create and
essentially perform a desired persona in the world of social media may be quite
empowering. Our lives are broadcasted,
censored and monitored by our own selves, lending each individual with the
power to determine the blurring lines between their ‘real’ and constructed
identities.
Sources:
Raessens, J. 2005,
‘Computer games as participatory media culture’, Handbook of Computer Game Studies, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp.
373-388
Thomas, A, 2007, ‘Youth
Online: Identity and Literacy in the digital age’, Peter Lang Publishing, New
York
Bell, D, 2000, ‘An Introduction
to Cyber Cultures’, Routledge, London
Lim,
M, 2012, ‘Life is Local in the Imagined Global Community: Islam and Politics in
the Indonesian Blogosphere’, Journal of Media and Religion, vol. 11, pp 127-140
Huffaker, D, 2004, Gender similarities and differences in
online identity and language use among teenage bloggers, Georgetown
University, Washington
Kaplan,
A, Haenlein, M, 2011, Users of the world, unite! The challenges and
opportunities of Social Media, Business
Horizons, vol 54, issue 3, pgs 241-251
Zhao,
S, Grasmuck, S, 2008, Identity Construction on Facebook: Digital Empowerment in
Anchored Relationships, Computers in
Human Behaviour, vol 24, issue 5, pgs 1816-1836
Thinking about...Hollywoodisation and Asianisation
“Capitalism’s world-historical tendency to break down national barriers,
obliterate national distinctions and to assimilate nations is a tendency which
manifests itself more powerfully with every passing decade…” (Lenin, V, 1924).
This powerful quote is particularly relevant to understanding the concept
of ‘Hollywoodisation’, and how transnational entertainment industries have
fallen under this paradigm. Wasser (1995) describes the process by which
America now gains financial support for entertainment industries from purely domestic
sources, not cross-culturally, as a form of Hollywood domination. Wasser (1995)
believes by “…concentrating on the financing of American films the history of
Hollywood trans-nationalization can be isolated”.
Japanese anime is particularly significant in describing both the process
of Hollywoodisation and Asianisation, and how they have transformed the Western
entertainment industry. The breakthrough of anime was particularly prominent in
the 1980s, and consisted of metaphysical, horror or science fiction type themes
(Sexton, J, Mathijs, E, 2011). What is particularly interesting about anime is
that there was not necessarily always a ‘good triumphs over evil’ solution in
their movies or shows, which challenged audiences to view the world with ‘unclouded
eyes’ (Sexton, J, Mathijs, E, 2011).
Shows such as ‘Astro Boy’ are a
particular nostalgic highlight for the baby-boomer generation. Drawing on this
example, we can see how there has been a Hollywood adaption in order to appeal
to a Western audience. Action in anime typically takes a long time to unfold in
order to heighten the anticipated suspense of a scene, and includes many
moments with no dialogue at all. American versions of anime shows such as Kiki’s Delivery Service have been edited
to include further dialogue and sounds in order to fill silent gaps (Poitras,
G, 2001). Further, violence in anime presents instances where people do get
hurt, comparatively to American cartoons in which the protagonist may fall off
a cliff, land on the pavement, then brush themselves off and continue to fight
crime (Poitras, G, 2001). Traditionally themes have also been edited to
emphasis romance, heroism and the triumph of good over evil.
Hollywood has constrained and manipulated anime productions to push
common American ideologies and mould them into traditional Western storylines. They
have transformed anime into a censored product targeted at children, rather
than the violent, over sexualised, traditional nature anime productions.
Sources:
Poitras, G, 2001, Anime Essentials:
Everything a Fan Needs to Know, Stone Bridge Press, U.S.
Sexton, J, Mathijs, E, 2011, Cult
Cinema, Blackwell Publishing, UK
Wasser, F,
1995, ‘Is Hollywood America? The Trans-nationalization of the American Film
Industry’ Critical Studies in Mass Communication, Vol 12, pp423-437
With the introduction of new
social media forms, words such as ‘voyeurism’ and ‘scopophilia’ that were
traditionally associated with Alfred Hitchcock movies are simply adjectives for
the nature of active internet users. Our love of looking, watching or
intimately ‘spying’ on other people’s lives is now downplayed with accessibility
through Facebook, Twitter, Instgram, Snapchat and other similar mediums.
David Marshall (2010) asserts
that with these new media platforms greater portions of the
populace are now constructing online public personas. He describes the term
‘specular’ as a two-way mirror projection on to the screen and the circulation
of and interaction with those images and texts into the wider world. Indeed,
our Facebook profile is an entirely constructed space to project a sense of who
we want to be perceived as, not necessarily who we actually are. My profile
pictures, for example, are chosen due to how incredibly amazing they make me
look (add a bit of a filter, maybe crop out my arm because it looks a little
fat…). If my Facebook pictures truly reflected my daily appearance, I highly doubt
I’d have 100 likes on those photos.
Marshall (2010) perceives our modern world as a well-developed
specular economy whose foundations are derived from the much longer tradition
of celebrity culture and whose repercussions relate to an emerging
comfortability with a society of surveillance. As much as it may seem surreal, privacy
is not as valued as it has previously been. We have become accustomed to broadcasting
our intimate lives and becoming involved in trivial matters in other peoples (Bentley,
P, 2011). Who we’re having coffee with, where we go to the gym, and who we are
in a relationship with. No longer can we call our friend crying with “Bring me
chocolate! I just got dumped”. Before you can pull out that litre tub of ice-cream
from the freezer I’m sure she’ll be calling you, saying “Babe, saw your status!
Are you ok? What happened? Do I need a shovel?”
In agreement with Marshall (2010), I do believe this
replicates the notion of celebrity culture. The life of a celebrity is one
lived under surveillance, and is broadcasted based on entertainment value. This
is replicated via our own social media usage. When you meet Josh Thomas at
Myer, you put a photo on Instagram. When you win an athletics state
championship, up goes a status (with the expectation of 1000 likes and “BOO YAH”
comments). And your followers are just as interested as they might be in Beyoncé’s
breakfast. And these could be people you hardly know. Creepy.
Can you imagine a world without Facebook? I do. I
call it…childhood. However, in our modern technologized media culture, Facebook
has become a core competent of our participation in both our online worlds and
our external environment.
Raessens (2005) describes two key terms that are
useful in allowing us to understand the cultural shifts that were initiated by
the Facebook phenomenon. In reference to computer games, he describes virtuality
as the possibility to stimulate virtual worlds a gamer can explore. Michael
Heim described virtual reality as “an event or entity that is real in effect but
not in fact” (Raessens, J, 2005).
Ultimately, this is what Facebook is about.
Creating a world in which we can both escape and keep in tuned with our
external reality. The fact that we can choose to alter our identity depending
on the photos we post, status’ we write and people we connect with essentially creates
a virtual world designed by the individual. A world where we have the freedom
to be who we want to be. A world where we can chat with our friends and ignore
conversation from others. A world where we are free to “Like” that girl’s photo
of her new Tony Bianco’s, when in
reality we’d probably pretend not to see her if she walked past us on the
street…and it’s not (that) weird!
Raessens (2005) also describes the process of
interactivity through the example of Andrew Cameron who believes interactivity
means “the ability to intervene in a meaningful way within the representation
itself”. Our experience every time we log in to Facebook is dependent on what
we want to do. We control what activities we engage in, what we post and who we
stalk which ultimately constructs our Facebook experience. It allows us to connect
with our friends, and broadcast what we’re up to in our lives with the
expectation that we will gauge response and interaction from other users. The
absence of a Facebook profile can surely lead to a feeling of isolation from
your circle of friends (Johanson, I, 2013). How will you know what they ate for lunch
without it?
However, with interactivity and virtuality comes
precautions. Being too engaged in a virtual world can lead to
misinterpretations, and false expectations. Think about the last time you got
that call from your best friend…”HOW DARE my boyfriend add Tiffany Robertson on
Facebook! And tagged in a photo with her and 18 other people? Did you see that? And
he didn’t reply to my last message in like 24 minutes. Oh my god…he must be
cheating on me!”
Sources:
Raessens, J. 2005, ‘Computer games as participatory media culture’, Handbook of Computer Game Studies, MIT
Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp. 373-388
The practise of blogging is a particularly prevalent mode of
communication in our modern, Western society, and has created a community
culture in a world beyond our physical space. According to Lim (2012), blogs
have become a vehicle to produce a new communication sphere, allowing
individuals to broadcast their own social and political commentaries and to build
networks of individuals of similar interests. And that network should not be
underestimated.
When we think of cyber communities a range of ideas may come
to mind. Perhaps we initially think of our network of Facebook friends, most of
whom we don’t speak to but somehow seem to know they are dating Danny Smith,
the hunky but kind of inept boy from our old high school, planning a holiday to
Europe with their best friend, and getting paralytic drunk every single weekend.
Maybe we imagine our community and pseudo-family on “Family life” that we
develop a kind of unnatural soft spot for. Or maybe it is our cyber community
that we battle, converse and collaborate with in the realm of “Dungeons and
Dragons” (Ah no, I don’t play it…). Whatever community you can most associate
with, it is true to note that these cyber communities go beyond simple online
interaction. It becomes a place of identity and escapism.
For example, in July 2006, three cyber communities met in a
face-to-face event that served as a gathering for like-minded Indonesian Muslim’s
to discuss the importance of cyberspace, specifically the blogosphere. In this
case, the rapid expansion of the Internet enabled these Muslim groups to engage
globally with a community of like-minded individuals with a cultural understanding
of each other (Lim, M, 2012). Cyber communities can be therefore seen as
cultural (Bell, D, 2000), not just in the sense that people are given the
opportunity to connect with other people of the same ethnic background, but through
the way it shapes the volatile nature and culture of society, and contributes
to creating a global community.
The internet sifts through content to allow individuals to
find others who are of a similar mind-set, and encourages them to converse
about certain ideas and interests. Blogs in particular allow people to express
their personal thoughts on a global platform, interacting with people who are
interested in them and their opinions. Almost like e-harmony, except without
the desperate desire to escape spending Saturday nights alone with a tub of
ice-cream. Instead, anyone can engage, broadcast, have cyber arguments with
people they don’t even know. You can’t get better than that.
Sources:
Bell, D, 2000, ‘An Introduction to Cyber Cultures’, Routledge,
London
