Social Networks: Identity Management Tools

SNSs (Social Networking sites), such as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter have become extremely popular worldwide. According to a recent study, 9 million out of 22 million Australians use social networking sites (Nielsen Group, 2010). Social networking sites are often researched in terms of their impacts on people’s privacy, ways of communicating and managing relationships with others. Social Networking Sites do more than enable socializing; they are impression management tools which allow us to manage the way others perceive us. The photos user’s post, the personal data they share and what they emphasize through updates and blogs are all elements that paint an image of how a person is aiming to portray themselves to others. Users craft their identity and guide perceptions by deliberately revealing particular information and presenting it in a particular way. These acts are not obvious all the time. This is because of the ‘realistic’ nature of social networking sites; all information is expected to be true. We take for granted that the information people portray has been shaped in particular ways because we assume it to be truthful. By comparing identity in SNSs to identity in gaming spaces (where information isn’t expected to reflect reality) we can see that it is not always noticeable when SNS users are managing their identity. When it isn’t obvious, it is more deceiving and powerful, as we don’t question the information users share on their profiles. This paper will outline how Social Networking Sites are being utilized to construct a particular identity of ourselves to others, focusing on Facebook. Users deliberately craft and maintain their profiles according to the identity they want to portray and the perceptions they want to influence.

Users provide certain information about themselves in order to guide how others perceive them. The photos, thoughts, events, and personal data people choose to share and not share with others is important as it helps us understand how a person is portraying themselves and their lives to others. This concept of revealing certain information to guide perceptions was discussed by Harrison & Thomas (2009, p. 114). They argue that the information users choose to reveal act as identity signals which guide people’s perceptions about a person. In May 2007 DiMicco & Millen studied 68 Facebook profiles of IBM employees to gain an understanding of how identity was portrayed within the company’s network. The following three segments were identified according to how users presented themselves through the information they revealed: 1) Reliving the College Days, 2) Dressed to Impress and 3) Living in the Business World. The study revealed Facebook users in the ‘Reliving the College Days’ segment presented themselves to be casual and laid back through the information they shared. Their profiles were full of quotes, favourite books and activities; all information which shapes how they are perceived. Users in the ‘Dressed to Impress’ segment presented themselves differently, with less focus on personal interests. As stated 12 out of 14 shared job related information, and profile pictures were a lot less playful and much more professional looking compared to the Reliving the College Days segment. “Both the limiting of personal information and the increase in professional cues (e.g. the suits and job descriptions) indicate that these users are actively presenting themselves as professionals” (DiMicco & Millen, 2007, p. 3). As identified in the above quote, users presented themselves as professionals so others would perceive them as professionals. This is proof that information users choose to reveal about themselves does have an impact on how they are perceived. All the information a user shares significantly contributes to the perceptions others form about them. Ryan (n.d.) agrees with the concept of SNSs being used to influence peer perceptions. “Facebook allows for a high degree of control over the projection of ones self” (Ryan, n.d.). Users post certain photos, share certain information, and update their network on certain life events to shape who their peers perceive them to be. For example if a person frequently posted photos of themselves at various social events their peers may interpret them as popular and socially active. The photos are based on ‘true events’ which makes it more powerful and convincing. However, just because the photos are based on reality doesn’t change the fact that posting the photos is a deliberate act designed to manipulate perceptions. The person may have posted the photos because they want to be perceived as popular and socially active to gain respect or even admiration from others. To conclude so far, SNS users reveal certain information in order to shape how they are portrayed and therefore perceived. Users also reveal information in certain ways in order to guide perceptions.

SNS users present information in particular ways in order to manage how they are perceived by others. Having an awareness of how a person chooses to reveal something (through text, photos, video, directing you to an outside website etc.) provides an understanding of how they are aiming to portray themselves. A hypothetical example would be Jane Smith recently getting married. Would she share this information by updating her ‘relationship status’ or post her favourite selection of wedding photos which make her look glamorous, and beautiful. Or would she just post an update saying “im married!” or “as of now I am totally off the market”. How she chooses to reveal the fact that she’s married tells us how she wants others to perceive the news, and perceive her. The language she uses when posting updates about the wedding is also significant. It makes suggestions about her views towards her marriage and her personality. Through language she can choose to share the news in a manner of her choice. She can share the news in a romantic, fun, excited, casual, formal, disappointed, or relieved manner. All the various ways she can share the news act as a representation of herself and the events of her life. As stated by Stern (2007, p. 8 ) identity construction in online communication can be extremely empowering, especially when the user knows there is an audience who is watching and listening. Many young people today feel as though they have to maintain how they are perceived online. Thompson (2008, p. 9) draws on this issue by stating the following:

This is a common complaint I heard, particularly from people in their 20s who were in college when Facebook appeared and have never lived as adults without online awareness. For them, participation isn’t optional. If you don’t dive in, other people will define who you are. So you constantly stream your pictures, your thoughts, your relationship status and what you’re doing — right now! — if only to ensure the virtual version of you is accurate, or at least the one you want to present to the world .

I can definitely relate to the above complaint made. As a 20 year old I strongly feel like it is crucial to manage my online identity for people in my network to view me in a particular way. Since joining Facebook I feel as though I have power over how others perceive me. Sharing information has become strategic and significant for me as I know have an audience, and I know the way I share information does influence peer perceptions. As argued by Turkle (1995, p. 26) “computers don’t just do things for us, they do things to us, including to our ways of thinking about ourselves and other people”. So far, we have discussed how users present certain information and reveal it in certain ways in order to influence how they are perceived. It is important to note that just because we acknowledge that users craft their identity doesn’t mean it is always noticeable to us when this is the case.

Identity management in virtual gaming spaces is more obvious than in SNSs. It is difficult to spot how a Facebook user has manipulated their identity when compared to how a game player has defined and shaped their identity. This makes SNSs more powerful in terms of identity management – because it is not commonly noticed. We perceive a user profile to be truthful and accurate rather then shaped in a particular way. A MUD (Multi-User Dungeon) allows users to create their own character/s. How users manipulate and construct their identity in MUDS is a popular topic of research and shares similarities to identity management in social networking sites. Turkle (1994, p. 162) states that in virtual gaming worlds the plain can represent themselves as beautiful, the nerdy can be elegant and the obese can be slender. If you knew a person who is obese in real life, but their character in a MUD was slim then it is very obvious how this person has crafted their identity online. However, in Facebook users are expected to represent themselves truthfully, making it difficult to spot the difference between ‘who they really are’ and how they have constructed their profile in order to portray themselves in a certain way. In a MUD an obese person can create a slim avatar. But in a SNS the person may only upload photos of when they were thinner or where they look thinner.  In MUDs users can be characters, can remain anonymous, or play a role that is as far away from their real role as they choose (Turkle 1994, p. 159). In MUDs users can radically experiment with identity; a female can be a male, a person can be an animal. SNSs are expected to portray ‘who you really are’. There is a solid expectation that the photos, posts and profile details are truthful and real. This is evident on Facebook’s Rights and Responsibilities page: “You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission” (Facebook Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, 2009). This is very different to MUDs, where an identity can be as unrealistic and far away from reality as desired. Turkle states that in games “you are who you pretend to be” (1994, p. 161). Players can be whoever they want to be because games do not need to reflect reality. In fact, the act of radically manipulating your identity in the game space is expected. The realistic nature of SNSs makes identity management difficult to detect. Social networking sites are a powerful platform for identity management. Dixon (2008, p. 59) argues that users of Facebook make use of its features in order to perform a particular identity to an audience. In relation to Dixon’s argument, it is not obvious in a SNS when an identity is being performed. This makes a social networking site extremely influential and powerful when it comes to identity management. This is because information is not questioned, and is seen as being truthful rather then shaped.

A Facebook profile can tell us a lot about how a person is aiming to portray themselves. The information users choose to share, and not share illustrates how they want to be perceived. Selection of detail is a fundamental part of how users on social networks manage their identity. A person can communicate the same news but in a different way through status updates, photos, video etc. What users choose to reveal about themselves and how they reveal this information provides an understanding of how identity can be managed on social networks. Many young adults today feel as though they need to frequently utilize social networks such as Facebook in order to manage how they are perceived by other people. Identity management on social networking websites is not as noticeable as it is in virtual gaming spaces. MUDs allow users to radically experiment with their identity; making this behaviour noticeable, and even expected. In SNSs it is much less noticeable because information posted is expected to reflect reality and real events. If it isn’t noticeable, it is more powerful. If we do not question a person’s profile then we are deceived by the various ways they have tried to manage the way they are perceived. Social Networks are powerful entities as they allow users to manage they way they represent themselves to others and in turn influence how other people perceive them. Identity management is not always obvious; which makes SNSs extremely powerful identity management tools.

References

DiMicco, J.M., & Millen, D.R. (2007). Identity Management: Multiple Presentations of Self in Facebook. In Proc ACM Group Conference (2007). Retrieved March 19, 2010, from http://www.joandimicco.com/pubs/dimicco-millen-group07.pdf

Dixon, G.N. (2008). Instant validation: Testing identity in Facebook. Retrieved April 20, 2010, from http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/4014

Facebook statement of rights and responsibilities. (2009). Retrieved April 20, 2010, from http://www.facebook.com/terms.php

Harrison, R., & Thomas, M. (2009). Identity in Online Communities: Social Networking Sites and Language Learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies, 7 (2), 109-124

Nielsen Group. (2010). Nielsen 2010 social media report. Retrieved April 20, 2010, from http://www.asiadigitalmap.com/2010/03/nielsen-2010-socialmedia-report/

Ryan, J. (n.d.) Bridging the virtual and the real. Retrieved March 24, 2010 from http://www.jennyryan.net/research/FacebookSpring06.htm

Stern, S.T. (2007). Instant Identity: Adolescent Girls and the World of Instant Messaging.  New York: Peter Lang Publishing

Thomas, A. (2007). Youth online: Identity and Literacy in the digital age. New York: Peter Lang Publishing

Thompson, C. (2008). Brave new world of digital Intimacy. New York Times September 5, 2008.  Retrieved March 29, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07awareness-t.html?_r=1.

Turkle, S. (1994). Constructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: playing in the MUDS. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1 (3), 158-167

Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: identity in the age of the internet. New York: Simon & Schuster

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia License