May 2018 – Page 4 – Debating Communities and Networks IX

Creative Identities in Creative Online Communities by Tikvah Jesse Vismer

Creative Identities in Creative Online Communities

by Tikvah Jesse Vismer

Abstract

The following paper argues that social media has not weakened creative identity in the creative communities online. This paper uses a number of journal articles, the book Steal Like an Artist: 10 Things Nobody Told You About Being Creative by Austin Kleon, as well as the Instagram photographer Dominique Davis, @allthatisshe, as a case study. The following paper will introduce the idea of identities and communities and will look at the concept of a creative community and the concept of a creative identity within this community. Then, it will discuss the concept of originality and demonstrate how originality. Next, this paper will discuss the concept of remixing and how this concept is linked to the concept of originality. Finally, using one Instagram photographer as a case study, this paper will aim to specifically use the concepts of originality and remixing to prove that social media has not weakened a creative’s identity in the creative communities online.

(Note: The photo set as my featured image is my own work)

Conference Paper

Introduction

Identity, the idea of identity, and the consciousness of one’s identity has always existed. This identity can be defined as “the fact of being who or what a person or thing is” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). As seen by Pirandello, an identity is something which is fabricated and the idea of one’s identity is dependent on the love and loyalty of others for its existence, and therefore, the performance and action through which identity is created is important (Merchant, 2006). The idea of community is something that has been constructed and is something which has also always existed. Community can be defined as “a group of people living in the same place or having particular characteristics in common” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). Online communities developed around social media sites exist in much the same way as well as vary, just as they do offline so to speak. Social media has become the foundation for an extensive range of practices and interests. Even though social media sites have users from all around the world, people come together to form communities based upon shared activities, interest, etc (Boyd and Ellison, 2007).

In these online communities, identity plays a very important role. In these types of communities, people can be whoever they want to be and they can choose what they wish to reveal or even make up about their identity (Pearson, 2009). This freedom found on the Internet through social media allows people to experiment with their identity and has provided both new potentials and challenges for the idea of identity. These communities have both created an opportunity for people to re-invent themselves, help in portraying themselves in new ways, or be a platform for people to express themselves and their identity. (Merchant, 2006). The idea of a community and the idea of having an identity are both dependant on the other in the way that an individual has an identity because they belong to any certain community, and therefore, one may very well have more than one identity or choose what parts of this identity to reveal to which community. Among many of the communities online, the creative community is one that is quite extensive, consisting of many different fields of creativity. Within these creative communities are many different creative identities, and like in any community, there are issues relating to one’s creative identity.

The following paper will look at the concept of a creative community as well as the concept of a creative identity within this community and argue that social media has not weakened identity in the creative communities online. More specifically this paper will aim to look at a photographer’s identity on Instagram. Firstly, this paper will describe and define creative communities and creative identities in more depth. Then, it will discuss the concept of originality and demonstrate how originality is linked to identity as well as how the concept of originality supports the argument. Next, this paper will discuss the concept of remixing and how this concept is linked to the concept of originality, as well as demonstrate how the concept of remix supports the argument. Finally, using one Instagram photographer as a case study, this paper will aim to specifically use the concepts of originality and remixing to prove that social media has not weakened a creative’s identity in the creative communities online.

Creative communities and creative identities

Firstly, having described the basic concept of identity and community, it can now be explained what is meant by creative communities online as well as what identity refers to in the context of this paper. The word creative can be defined as “relating to or involving the use of the imagination or original ideas to create something; having good imagination or original ideas” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). An alternate definition of the concept of community is “the condition of sharing or having certain attitudes and interests in common” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). Therefore, by combining the definitions of ‘creative’ and ‘community’, one can identify the concept of a creative community. A creative community can then be said to be a place where people who are creative share common interests, that is, their creativity, their want to create, and the medium used to express this creativity. Creative communities extend over numerous social media platforms and branch off into many common interests, such as on Instagram with photo content, on YouTube with video content, as well as blogs and many others.

Looking at another definition, identity can also refer to “the characteristics determining who or what a person or thing is” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). Jenkins (1996) once referred to identity as “the ways in which an individual and collectives are distinguished in their social relations with other individuals and collectives” (as cited in Fearon, 1999). In the context of this paper, another word to describe identity is ‘aesthetic’, which can be defined as “a set of principles underlying the work of a particular artist or artistic movement” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). Therefore, when identity, or rather creative identity, is referred to in this paper, it specifically refers to the characteristics that distinguish one artist from another through their specific aesthetic or style. This type of identity in creative communities relates to creative performance and is connected to how much of it is valued by the creative (Glaveanu and Tanggard, 2014). Therefore, more specifically in the further context of this paper, the concept of creative identity will refer to the aesthetic or style an individual photographer has that is evident in his work, or photographs. This specific style or aesthetic then creates a certain creative identity for the photographer within the creative community on Instagram and it is by this identity that the photographer is known.

The concept of originality

Now that the concepts of creative communities and context of identity has been defined, the concept of originality can be discussed as well as how originality is linked to a creative’s identity and how this can prove that social media has not weakened a creative’s identity in the creative communities online. The core of the argument of whether or not social media has weakened a creative’s identity is the issue of originality and the sensitivity of people when it comes to being inspired by another creative’s identity. There is much argument, across many social media platforms, especially Instagram and YouTube, over whether or not being inspired by another creative’s identity and imitating their work is stealing from and weakening their identity as a creative.

The first problem with claiming that people are stealing from or copying other creative’s identities is that no identity is original, or completely their own, to begin with. Nothing is new and nothing is original. As the well-known writer, Anton Chekov (1860-1904) once quoted, “There is nothing new in art except talent” (as cited on Good Reads, 2018). Therefore, no one has a creative identity that is just theirs, the only thing that one has that is different is their talent. When asked about where creative ideas come from, an honest creative will say that they were stolen. Nothing is original and all creative work is built on what came before. It is important to understand that nothing comes from nowhere. On the notion that nothing is truly original, originality can be seen rather as uniqueness (Simonton, 2016). No creative person is born with their creative identity, style, or aesthetic. An individual learns who they are, and they learn this through copying. Copying, however, in this case refers to practice, not plagiarism, as that is when one tries to pass another’s work off as their own, and a true creative is not trying to do that. A creative is a selective collector of ideas they love, and they accept inspiration instead of run from it (Kleon, 2012). William Ralph Inge once stated, “What is originality? Undetected plagiarism” (as cited by Kleon, 2012, p.8). The idea of a creative identity is linked to the idea that their identity is original. However, this cannot be the case, as mentioned earlier, nothing can ever be completely original. Therefore, due to the fact that nothing is original to begin with, creative identities in online creative communities cannot be weakened, as each creative identity was initially inspired by someone else’s identity.

The concept of remixing

Next the concept of remixing will be discussed and how remixing can be connected to originality as well as how this concept can support the argument that social media has not weakened creative identity in the creative communities online. The word remix can be defined as to “produce a different version of (a musical recording by altering the balance of the separate tracks” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018). Therefore, in the context of this paper, the concept of remixing refers to someone creating and taking a different photograph, however, still using a balance of the key separate aspects from the creative identity they were inspired by in the creative community of photographers. Being constantly inspired by other creative identities helps to create our own creative identity, as every new idea is simply a remix of things seen before. Although a creative’s identity may be developed through the identities of others, what is unique about each individual identity is their talent. One’s creative identity is then formed through what they let into their life and then they become the sum of their inspirations (Kleon, 2012). As Goethe once said, “we are shaped and fashioned by what we love” (as cited in Kleon, 2012, p.11). Therefore, if no one ever imitates, or remixes, anything, no one will ever create anything. However, the idea behind being inspired by other creative identities is not to blatantly always do whatever they do and exactly as they do it. The idea is that in order to start creating one’s own identity, they steal from whatever inspires them and they choose only the things that stand out to them and then from there they begin to find their own identity and aesthetic. Therefore, one is not only taking ideas from those who inspire them, they are also taking from the way they think (Kleon, 2012).

One slowly becomes as good as the things they choose to surround themselves with and be inspired by. No creative ever truly knows who they are, ever. Every creative is consistently trying to create, and one learns and finds their own creative identity though copying and remixing others. If people waited until they found their identity before they started creating, they would never create anything and they would never find their identity. Creative identity comes from constantly being inspired by what is found in the creative community, and a creative identity is found by remixing another’s. The same is true about learning how to write, one needs to copy down the alphabet in order to put it together for what they eventually want to say. Then, at some moment in time, this imitation game turns to emulation, which is one step further into finding one’s own creativity identity and breaking into their own aesthetic (Kleon, 2012). As Francis Ford Coppola once said, “We want you to take from us. We want you, at first, to steal from us, because you can’t steal. You will take what we give you and you will put it in your own voice and that’s how you will find your voice. And that’s how you begin. And then one day someone will steal from you” (as cited by Kleon, 2012, p. 37). However, whatever the case, as quoted by Kleon (2012, p. 34), “the human hand is incapable of making a perfect copy” and therefore, a creative’s identity cannot be weakened as those who are inspired by it are only ever remixing it.

Case study – Dominique Davis

Finally, after discussing how a creative’s identity cannot be weakened by social media in the online creative communities because of the concepts of originality and remixing, one Instagram photographer can be used as a case study to specifically demonstrate how the concepts of originality and remixing can be used to prove that social media has not weakened a creative’s identity in the creative communities online. The one Instagram case study will be Dominique Davis, @allthatisshe. Her very well-known Instagram photographer identity will be discussed and then will be compared to another smaller, less well-known Instagram photographer, in order to show how one’s creative identity cannot be weakened through creative communities on social media.

Dominique Davis, @allthatisshe, is a content creator, Instagram coach, and writer who lives in Durham, United Kingdom. She has a very specific creative identity is very well-known for her creative photographs, especially those involving her and her two daughters together, dressed up very similar and doing the same thing, as shown in the screenshots below.

Below is the less well-know Instagram photographer Sina, @happygreylucky. Her Instagram profile can be accused of being a copy of Dominique’s due to pointing out a few similarities, thus weakening Dominique’s creative identity. However, due to the fact that nothing is original and within the creative communities, people remix other ideas and make them into their own, it can be said that Sina does not weaken Dominique’s creative identity or who she is on Instagram, but in fact has her own unique creative identity on Instagram.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it has been discussed within the various creative communities online whether or not the extensive nature of social media has weakened a creative’s identity within these creative communities. However, through discussing the concept of a creative community and the concept of creative identities as well as the concepts of originality and remixing, it can be said that this is not the case. Creative communities are places were people who are creative share common interests. Creative identity refers to the aesthetic and style a creative uses to distinguish themselves from each other. Due to concept of originality, it can be said that no identity is original and because of this, no identity can be weakened as a creative’s identity has always been formed through someone else’s ideas or concepts. Due to the concept of remixing, it can also be said the social media has not weakened a creative’s identity in creative online communities, as one is simply using another’s way of thinking to create their own, and therefore, this process of remixing cannot weaken someone’s creative identity or who they are within a creative community online. All these point were also demonstrated through using Dominique Davis, @allthatisshe, as a case study and by comparing her creative identity to another seemingly similar creative identity within the photographic creative community on Instagram. It was seen that these two profiles in no way weakened the other’s identity, even though similarities could be pointed out. In the end, that is the whole idea behind being in a creative community: to inspire and be inspired. Therefore, rather than weakening creative identities in creative communities, social media has only created an even bigger platform for people to be inspired and then in turn strengthen and grow their own creative identity. After all, as Pablo Picasso once quoted, “Art is theft” (as cited by Kleon, 2012, p.1).

Reference List

Boyd, D. M. and Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communications, 13(1), 210-230. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x.

Davis, D. (2018). Dominique Instagram Profile [Screenshot]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/allthatisshe/.

Fearon, J.D. (1999). What is Identity (as we now use the word)?. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/group/fearon-research/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/What-is-Identity-as-we-now-use-the-word-.pdf.

Glaveanu, V. P., and Tanggard, L. (2014). Creativity, identity, and representation: Towards a socio-cultural theory of creative identity. New Ideas in Psychology, 34, 12-21. Retrieved from https://business-institute.dk/media/1193/vlad-lene-2014.pdf.

Good Reads. (2018). Anton Chekhov: Quotes. Retrieved from https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/400240-there-is-nothing-new-in-art-except-talent.

Kleon, A. (2012). Steal Like an Artist: 10 Things Nobody Told You About Being Creative. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/reader.action?docID=3418972&query=steal+like+an+artist+austin+kleon.

Merchant, G. (2006). Identity, Social Networks and Communication. E-Learning, 3(2), 235-243. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.2304/elea.2006.3.2.235.

Oxford Dictionary. (2018). The definition of ‘aesthetic’. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/aesthetic.

Oxford Dictionary. (2018). The definition of ‘community’. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/community.

Oxford Dictionary. (2018). The definition of ‘creative’. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/creative.

Oxford Dictionary. (2018). The definition of ‘identity’. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/identity.

Oxford Dictionary. (2018). The definition of ‘remix’. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/remix.

Pearson, E. (2009). All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks. First Monday, 14(3). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2162/2127.

Simonton, D.K. (2016). Defining Creativity: Don’t We Also Need to Define What is Not Creative?. Journal of Creative Behaviour. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/10.1002/jocb.137.

Sina. (2018). Sina Instagram Profile [Screenshot]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/happygreylucky/.

Social Networks: Public Relations and Twitter Communities

Keely Duffield

Curtin University

Abstract

This paper explores the notion that Twitter as a microblogging social network is an efficient tool for Public Relations (PR) professionals to build long-lasting relationships with networked communities. It presents the advantages of social networks include a decrease in geographical locations and spatial boundaries, while also having the ability to send 140-character messages to mass users among various multimedia platforms. The paper argues these affordances with the support of examples to demonstrate why this is efficient for PR professionals when building strong relationships in the Twitter community. To support the argument, a case study examining the American Red Cross as an organisation that regularly users Twitter to build relationships with publics will also be included. The paper also evaluates the limitations of communicating with communities online and whether this outweighs offline face-to-face communication with communities. Ultimately, the evaluation of limitations comes to the conclusion that PR professionals need the efficiency of online social networks to engage with communities as well as the traditional meaningfulness of face-to-face communication, this demonstrating the blurred boundaries between online and offline communities.

Key Words: social networks, virtual communities, Public Relations, Twitter

Introduction

Social networking has created a platform for communities online to communicate in new ways that compresses the boundaries of time and space. Online social networking platforms such as Twitter have become an efficient resource for Public Relations professionals to build long-meaningful relationships with networked communities. While offline communications are valuable in Public Relations, social networking has decreased the barriers of time and space allowing professionals to use communication strategies within the Twitter community that aren’t available offline. The Twitter community facilitates efficient communication strategies that gives PR a number of advantages in building relationships with networked publics. These advantages include a larger community in terms of geographical locations broadened, the control of time online, and using multimedia platforms and word-of-mouth to reach a wider community. A case study conducted by the American Red Cross demonstrates how each of these advantages assist PR professionals when building relationships with the Twitter community. However, it could also be argued that there are limitations when communicating through social networks in contrast to building meaningful relationships with communities offline. When evaluating both the advantages and limitations in engaging communities online, it’s imperative to understand that both social networking communities online and offline communities present different forms of communication that are essential in building professional relationships. These types of communication demonstrate that there are blurred lines between online and offline networks.

The platform Twitter organises its own communities through networks of individuals linked together sharing information, ideas, and desires. Calhoun (2002) defined virtual communities “large groups of individuals who may be linked together to share information, ideas, feelings, and desires” whilst being independent of geospatial location (as cited in Katz et al. 2004, 325). The virtual community sees the physical community as potentially repressive, as it ignores despatialised interests. Instead, virtual communities attempt to break through some of the boundaries of race, gender, ethnicity, and geographic location established in physical communities (Katz et al. 2004, 326). Although physical communities contrast with virtual communities through face-to-face communication and communication within technology, both forms of the community become blurred as they share specific characteristics such as intimacy ties, information-driven, and high social influence of human action (Baym et al. 2007, p.736). These characteristics are recognisable Twitter as intimacy ties and information-driven content are formed through conversations of shared thoughts and feelings, while high social influence of human action is the continuous connection of tweets and re-tweets that circulate throughout the twitter community. The idea that virtual networked communities on Twitter can present comparative strong ties to physical communities can be argued in the role of PR influence within Twitter communities. An example of this can be presidential campaign elections conducted through Twitter. In 2016 Donald Trump reasoned that 28 million followers across various social media platforms helped him win the presidential election against Hillary Clinton (McCormick, 2016).

Advantages of the Twitter Community and online communication

To use social media in PR campaigns such as a presidential election allows PR professionals to input influential tactics such as geographic location, timeliness, and multimedia messages to the masses in order to build communities and followers online. Kats et al. (2014) argue that virtual communities differentiate from physical communities by the independence of geographical location. Digital media encourages globalisation as social networks have the ability to create online communities by allowing individuals to contact strangers from another location out of close vicinity. When individuals communicate with distant ties they use “space-transcending affordances” of social media networking that wouldn’t be made possible offline (Boase 2008, p. 493). These affordances include communicating with other online users asynchronously and instantaneously (Jensan et al. 2009 p. 2170). As the Internet decreases the barriers of geographical locations, social networking communities such as the Twitter community gain a greater understanding of cultural and religious variations. In doing so this creates smaller, more exclusive communities within the larger Twitter network. A smaller community of different interest and desires allows PR professionals to target a wider or specific range of publics for communication strategies. These communities can identify in the example of #kony2012, a campaign in which presented a dictator who kidnapped children to become child soldiers for a suspected civil war in Africa. The campaign as it is now known as a hoax but during this period built a large following from all over the world and managed to influence these online communities enough to send money the campaign protesting against Kony (Sichynsky 2016). This campaign demonstrates by decreasing geographic locations online is a major factor as to how PR professionals have the ability to use cultural differences to build relationships with communities online.

Traditionally to communicate offline, communities would use face-to-face contact, this communication for would only occur on occasion or weekly. However, due to the affordances of the Internet communities on Twitter have the ability to communicate instantly and asynchronously. Timeliness online allows PR professionals to not only post updates to the Twitter community regularly but also respond to a crisis in a timely manner, thus reducing the damage of losing stakeholder relationships. Timeliness on Twitter allows the public to respond to a crisis around the world in real time. In recent events that occurred, Steve Smith (Australia’s cricket captain) had been found guilty for a ball-tampering scandal in a recent test match. Smith’s apology statement at the press conference led to thousands of fans writing their sympathies for the Australian captain on Twitter (“Twitter reactions to Steve Smith,” 2018). Taking action quickly as an organisation can lead to responses from the Twitter community within a matter of minutes. In Smith’s case, the community’s mass responses have the potential to change the opinions of the rest of the public.

Virtual communities are not limited to one social media platform in which they communicate. Often communities that are formed offline use social networking sites as an affordance for communicating. Not only has social media allowed communities to communicate but to communicate on various platforms that are suited appropriately for the audience viewing the content; platforms include Linkedin to network business associates, Twitter for news, and Facebook for social (Saffer, Sommerfeldt, & Taylor 2013). Social media networks often have an algorithm that allows user accounts on platforms to connect with other social media platforms. This contributes to building larger communities online. Twitter as microblogging network meant that individuals that posted regularly and who followed over 100 accounts, would often expect to have more followers in return. This shows that what an individual posted online a mass sum of followers could like and retweet creating more attention to content created (Boyd 2006). Hashtags are an effective tool for PR professionals to link a particular interest or idea across a networking platform. Using hashtags on Twitter creates awareness around a topic by clicking the link it leads to a page on that particular platform presenting all post that uses the linked hashtag (Su et al. 2017, p.576). Using hashtags on Twitter generates conversation within the online community, especially activist hashtags and tweets. A popular example is the hashtag #blacklivesmatter which was tweeted over twelve million times (Sichynsky 2016), this changing a large percentage of Twitter to create a unified online community. Twitters social networking tools can build and maintain relationships between institutions and online communities through the use of tweets, hashtags, and hyperlinks (Su et al. 2017, p.576). By using Twitters social networking tools, it allows PR professionals to connect with other social media platforms, therefore becoming effective in creating larger communities within social networks to build stronger relationships.

When evaluating a company and consumer relationship, it is recognisable there is often a lack of trust coming from the consumers’ perception of the company. Twitter’s way of crafting short messages to reach the masses asynchronously and instantaneously has only enhanced the opportunity for PR professionals to build stronger relationships with the Twitter community. Twitter has made it simple for PR professionals to ensure trust with its publics through online conversations via word-of-mouth. Richins and Root-Shaffer (1988) defined word-of-mouth as the process whereby information is transferred from person to person, contributing to customers buying decisions (as cited in Janson et al., 2009). By understanding Twitter’s casualness an organisation can tweet to its community and if the message is positive the masses will continue to re-tweet and tweet positive reviews about organisation, hence building greater trust between consumer and company. In a research study conducted by Jansen et al. (2009, p.2177) the results showed that 60% of tweets for brands were positive and just over 22% of tweets were negative. The research also found that while there was more positive brand word-of-mouth circulating Twitter, prior research literature formulated that negative tweets have greater significance. The research conducted demonstrates that when businesses use microblogging websites it creates a space to allow two-way symmetrical communication between companies and consumers. Therefore, this allows the Twitter community to have more trust in companies by using word-of-mouth is gives the community an input in brands. This efficient PR tactic, therefore, creates a more positive, balanced relationship between Businesses and online communities.

Case Study: American Red Cross Organisation

Briones et al. (2011) conducted a case study survey, interviewing 40 participants from the American Red Cross organisation in order to examine the usefulness of social networking sites for PR communication strategies. The literature review for the research explains that not-for-profit organisations greatly benefit from social media not only because it strengthens relationships between the organisation and the community but also it allows virtual communities to have more input and collaboration within the community. The survey results showed that two-way communication dialogue developed between the Red Cross and the younger Twitter community has proven to be a valuable communication strategy for building long-lasting relationships between the organisation and its publics. The results support the idea that virtual communities on social networks appreciate two-way dialogues many of the participants stated that social media allows them to “be a part of the conversation” (Briones et al 2011, p.38). Su et al. (2014, p.573) argued that the two-way model is relevant to social media practices as they are dialogue based. In the findings, it was also notable that many participants found Twitter and Facebook were the best social media tools for building stronger relationships with the community. One participant stated, “It’s actually better, we get more response from our postings on Facebook and Twitter than our more traditional” (as cited in Briones et al. 2011 p.39).

When examining the American Red Cross case study, it can be identified that the encouragement of using Twitter to build stronger relationships was fuelled by positive reactions toward two-way communication. The success of the American Red Cross relationship with the Twitter community relies on the affordances that the Internet provides. It allows the ability to send a message instantaneously and asynchronously to another user that isn’t in the same geographic location. Not only this but social networking has the affordance to send a message to mass audiences using hashtags to get messages across to multimedia platforms during times of crisis. These affordances of social networking are the reasons the Red Cross has the capability of building strong relationships with communities online and offline.

Limitations of online communication strategies in communities

While PR still currently uses traditional media and face-to-face as a means of communication with stakeholders, social media is now an effective tool used for communicating with public on a more regular basis. The one-way communication model limited communities to engage with organisational branding. However, there are theorists such as Cummings et al. (2000) and Albrecht & Adelman (1987) that would argue that traditional media and face-to-face communication with stakeholders encourage more meaningful relationships (as cited in Baym 2007, p. 737). The limitations of social networking with communities online can be difficult to have control over conversations and responses. It can also lead to information being lost or becoming misinterpreted by the mass audience. However, it could be argued that using PR strategies offline has proven to be equally important as using them online. As Web 2.0 becomes embedded in everyday lives, it’s rare to find a community offline that doesn’t use social networks as a tool for interaction. Gruzd, Wellman, and Takheyev (2011) argued the idea that personal networks are still more robust than online social networking, however, each form of communication can enhance the other. The theorists state, “For years, social scientists have responded by systematically showing that almost all people who interact communally online also see each other in person. They have found that the Internet and in-person contact extend and enhance each other, rather than replace each other” (Boase & Wellman, 2006; Chua et al. 2010). Therefore, it is important for PR practitioners to stay relevant to their publics. To do these practitioners need to maintain community relationships and engage with communities equally online and offline.

Conclusion

Online social networks have facilitated a space that allows PR professionals to use networking and microblogging platforms such as Twitter to build long-meaningful relationships with online communities. The advantages of social network platforms have allowed PR professionals efficiently connect virtual communities. The affordances of online social networks include the decrease in geographical and spatial boundaries, and the ability to send a message to a mass number of online users that can be reached across multiple social networking platforms via word-of-mouth, tweets, and hashtags. Each of these social networking advantages is evident in the American Red Cross case study, demonstrating that each advantage has made it more efficient for PR professionals to build a long-lasting relationship with the Twitter community. It’s recognisable that there are limitations to communicating online such as the loss of control in conversations and messages lost amongst the masses, therefore, it’s valuable to use offline communication strategies as well. It’s also important to consider that PR relies on communication online and offline as they support each other as the boundaries become blurred. The significance of online communities within social networks will only expand in PR practice, as communities support a forum where they are able to engage and create this building further trust between organisations and public. Ultimately, it’s important to consider that Twitter as a microblogging social networking platform has made communication for communities and PR significantly effective.

References

Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., Kunkel, A., Ledbetter, A., & Lin, M. (2007). Relational quality and media use in interpersonal relationships. New Media & Society. 9(5), 735-752. http://dx.doi.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1177/1461444807080339

Boase, J. (2008). Personal Networks and the Personal Communication System: Using multiple media to connect. Information, Communication & Society, 11(4), 490-508. Doi: http://dx.doi.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1080/13691180801999001

Boyd, d. (2006). Friends, Friendsters and Top 8: Writing Community into Being on Social Network Sites. First Monday, 12(4). http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1418/1336

Briones, R. L., Kuch, B., Liu, B. F., & Jin, Y. (2011). Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships. Public relations review. 37(1), 37-43.

Gruzd, A. Wellman, B. and Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community. American Behavioral Scientist. 55(10). 1294 – 1318. Doi: 10.1177/0002764211409378

Jansen, B., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., & Chowdury, A. (2009). Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of The American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(11). 2169-2188. DOI: 10.1002/asi.21149

Katz, J. E., Rice, R. E., Acord, S., Dasgupta, K., & David, K. (2004). Personal Mediated Communication and the Concept of Community in Theory and Practice. In P. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication and Community: Communication Yearbook. 28 (pp. 315-371).
http://www.comm.ucsb.edu/faculty/rrice/A80KatzRiceAcordDasguptaDavid2004.pdf

McCormick, R. (2016). “Donald Trump says Facebook and Twitter ‘helped him win.’” The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/13/13619148/trump-facebook-twitter-helped-win

Sichynsky, T. (2016). “The 10 Twitter hashtags changed the way we talk about social issues.” The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/

Saffer, A., Sommerfeldt, E., & Taylor, M. (2013). The effects of organizational Twitter interactivity on organization–public relationships. Public Relations Review. 39(3), 213-215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.02.005

Su, L. Y., Scheufele, D. A., Bell, L., Brossard, D., & Xenos, M. A. (2017). Information-sharing and community-building: Exploring the use of twitter in science public relations. Science Communication 39(5), 569-597. http://dx.doi.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1177/1075547017734226 Retrieved from

Twitter reactions to Steve Smith’s emotional press conference. (2018, March 29). Sports: The Times of India. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com.

Young Adolescent Friendships on Social Network Platforms

Young Adolescent Friendships on

Social Network Platforms

Synn Shiuan Pan

Curtin University

Abstract

The rise of internet use has led to the establishment of various online communication technologies that are now defining how people create and maintain relationships. Social networking platforms are now used as an addition to friendships offline. It is commonly used to establish new friendships and maintaining existing ones. Philosophers have contributed their opinions regarding online friendships in journal and research studies and others through theory. According to Marlowe, Bartley & Collins (2017), digitisation has increased the use of social networking platforms in making and maintaining friendships, but it is believed that it will not replace traditional friendships but supplements it. This paper highlights some aspects used by different scholars to review the advantages of online friendships in establishing, maintaining offline relationships, and identity online on social networks platforms especially in young adolescents stages. Besides that, this will provide objections and counter objections regarding online friendships.

Keywords: face-to-face interactions, friendships online, social networks, digitisation, young adolescent

Young Adolescents Friendships on Social Network Platforms

According to Amichai-Hamburger, Kingsbury & Schneider (2013), “the essence of friendship has been deliberated by psychologists, philosophers, anthropologists and sociologists”. Amichai-Hamburger, Kingsbury & Schneider (2013) argues that friendship is a hybrid of a relationship with mutual benefit and intimacy, and the use of social networking platforms has made the concept of friendship less significant. Although there were disadvantages that were brought by the social network, research shows that it mostly brings people into a stronger community and making maintaining friendships easier than traditionally.

Today, the formation of new friendships and the way of maintaining existing friendships has changed due to social networking platforms. A significant amount of friendships is maintained and formed online on social networking platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. It is now one of the primary sources of interaction between people. The interaction between people can be entirely digitalised. For instance, friendships that are formed online can purely be online without any face-to-face interaction. Even though philosophers have questioned whether real friendships can be achieved online in a completely new world where individuals never experience face-to-face interaction (Kaliarnta, 2016). It is believed that strong ties are possible for friendships online. Without face-to-face interaction, personal information and messages can be conveyed without any tensions. Face-to-face interaction may cause unintended pressure to people by the environment or people around. According to Van Schalkwyk, Marin, Ortiz, Rolison, Qayyum, McPartland & Silverman (2017), social networking platform users utilises it to maintain and establish existing friendship ties. Social networks can strengthen ties between people as a supplement of existing friendships. Besides that, research has shown that communications online through social networks has the potential of decreasing loneliness and depression (Van Schalkwyk, Marin, Ortiz, Rolison, Qayyum, McPartland & Silverman, 2017). Establishing new friendships online is easier because it is less intimate in the beginning which makes it more comfortable for users to interact with each other. Most young people prefer online friendships due to these factors.

The main argument about the potential of online friendships is the ability of individuals to revel their real character and identity either intentionally or unintentionally. It is known that young people are more likely to share personal information online than offline (Van Schalkwyk, Marin, Ortiz, Rolison, Qayyum, McPartland & Silverman, 2017). Young adolescents are more comfortable with shortened contact and fast-paced interaction. Young people utilises social networks to develop friendships in a shorter amount of time than face-to-face interactions. According to Niland, Lyons, Goodwin & Hutton (2015), the transition of young adults to a self-focused life has led them to use social networking technologies more in assistant of their friendships, both establishing and maintaining. Niland, Lyons, Goodwin & Hutton (2015) argued that adolescents are the most significant consumers of social networking platforms such as Instagram and Facebook and this demonstrates the generational change in how personal relationships are engaged and managed. As a result, the impact of social networking platforms and online friendships have shifted from face-to-face interactions (Niland, Lyons, Goodwin & Hutton, 2015). According to Elder (2014), the affordances of social networking platforms have extended the behaviour of people to a new world of communication where they share their photos and personal lifestyle to an invisible and larger audience. Traditionally, friendships are mostly formed in places such as schools and workplace, which is usually a smaller community and less people. With the growing population of social networking platforms today, it creates a larger audience and more opportunities for people to establish new friendships online.

Niland, Lyons, Goodwin & Hutton (2015) argue that friendship is a psychological issue whose development is determined by personal attachment and character. These qualities are crucial in the life phase development of young people. In particular, these qualities include help and support, self-disclosure and liking, expressions of closeness and shared interests. However, at this life development phase, the young adults are often troubled by stress, risky and conflicting behavior and moodiness. This transition usually affects their opportunities of succeeding in the society and also maintaining their youthful cultural practices (Niland, Lyons, Goodwin & Hutton, 2015). This often causes them to have difficulties in seeing friendships and adapting their lives. Vallor (2012) argues that transitions that young people go through in life have led them to make sense of friendships as an investment, fun times together and protection. They use social network sites to create and reinforce friendships by using instant message and funny comments, especially on Facebook as a way of investing in that friendship. On Facebook, self-authenticity is a concept that youths demonstrate through photos and active displays. Facebook interactions now show how friendships are negotiated, reinforced and reworked. The young adult’s sense of friendship is a construct based on the immediate and visual friendship community, which has replaced the more intense and authentic friendships that existed before. A research has shown that young people consider friendships as “fun times together”. It is mostly just fun rather than emotional attachment and intimacy (Niland, Lyons, Goodwin & Hutton, 2015).

According to Antheunis, Schouten & Krahmer (2016), young adults usually consults their friends on life issues instead of their parents. As young adults continue to interact with their friends, these friends become a source of entertainment, the foundation of identity and create a sense of belonging. Friendships are preferred by young adults because they are less normative and less strictive. Among the young adults, the critical aspects of decent social life are having more friends (Antheunis, Schouten & Krahmer, 2016). Most of these friendships appear out of social networking platforms, which in several ways have strengthened the quality of friendships among the early adolescents. The increased use of these sites is due to the fact that they are comfortable to communicate, and they enhance the contact between friends. Social networks platforms are also affordable among the early adolescents who have limited financial resources. Consequently, this has led to social network sites being viewed as relationship maintenance tools and the frequent message exchanges in those platforms reduce the cost of maintaining friendships (Antheunis, Schouten & Krahmer, 2016). Antheunis, Schouten & Krahmer (2016) argue that there is a positive relationship between the utilisation of social network sites and quality of friendship. Online communication technologies have enhanced the communication between existing friends, and this has had a positive effect on the quality of their friendships. At the adolescent stage, there is increased importance for early adolescents to have peer relationships, but their significance becomes less relevant when they get older. These peer relationships can only be enhanced through social network sites (Antheunis, Schouten & Krahmer, 2016).

However, according to Bobkowski & Smith (2013), embracing of social media is not a worldwide phenomenon mainly by the aging population who are not dedicated in adopting new technology. Despite social network sites being used to bring our social change among young adults, the majority of emerging adults have not embraced this technology. One of the most significant factors that are determining social media adoption is the age of the majority of young adults, specifically those that have already adopted technology (Bobkowski & Smith, 2013). However, Bobkowski & Smith (2013) argues that digital divide has also led to the low adoption of technology, especially among the socioeconomically disadvantaged and minority populations. People that are living in more developed countries have the highest access to online technologies and their ability to embrace those technologies is also high. Despite the increased importance of social networks in friendships and relationships in the modern society, their influence can be overlooked, particularly among the disadvantaged groups. The existence of conventional imbalance now determines who uses and benefits from the use of social networking platforms (Bobkowski & Smith, 2013).

Marlowe, Bartley & Collins (2017) highlights that non-adopters of social media mainly populate the fringes of the emerging adult group while the adopters are the young adolescents. For the emerging adults, their future goals are less clear, biographies are less straightforward, and there is less certainty about their circumstances. As a result, they have fewer social ties and have difficulties concerning how they can overcome some of the challenges they go through when using modern technologies (Marlowe, Bartley & Collins, 2017).

According to Vallor (2012), the majority of social networking platform users value it more than their utility in relationship maintenance, or even creating virtual or new relationships. It is part of their daily life routine and their source for sense of belonging (Antheunis, Schouten & Krahmer, 2016). Most social networking platforms such as Facebook and Instagram offer suggestions for friends that users might know. These suggestions are usually based on the number of mutual friends, groups, location and communities. Function that are offered by social networking platforms allow more opportunities for people to establish new friendships. Despite social networking platforms providing a few direct channels towards shared activity, they still serve as a source of friendship and a good life. It is the case because it gives emotional and informational mutuality that assist individuals to live together as friends and also pursue excellence as a group. Social media has also promoted interests of civic leadership, especially among grass root organizations and the youth.

Limitations of the Studies

Various studies indicate that there is difficulty in determining causal relationships between friendships born out of social media and the ability to support them. Besides, it was challenging to identify whether adults who use social media end up getting into relationships. It was also challenging to determine whether individuals with many offline relations also benefit from social media. The studies assumed that social network sites are a favorite among the young adolescents who seek to build lasting friendships. Consequently, this makes them fail to analyze the importance of social media networks particularly in the modern business environment where a majority of business transactions close online. As a result, online technologies are a critical tool in business. Majority of companies have global reach, and they use social network sites to interact with their customers, primarily through advertising.

Young Adolescent Friendships on Social Network PlatformsConclusion

Although research studies have revealed that social network friendships will never achieve a healthy friendship and will remain superficial, it is known that social networking platforms are useful in helping users to keep in contact with each other and maintaining a long-term friendship. It can also be used to strengthen existing friendships and friendships offline. In the modern society, the majority of offline friendships are enhanced through social networking platforms to supplement face-to-face communications and interactions. It has become one of the most significant sources of interaction between people. Social networks have transitioned the daily interactions between users, and this has led to change in the culture of connectivity. Furthermore, social media has normalised how individuals engage socially. The majority of social networking platforms have reinforced existing networks, and this has resulted in a drastic change of friendships from face-to-face to now the preferred online integration. Friendships made online can stay digitalised entirely. Despite the quality of friendships, users are able to connect with each other conveniently. Research also shown that online friendships may potentially help with loneliness and depression in young adolescents. Lastly, social networking platforms have also brought about a new sense of belonging that would have been difficult to achieve through face-to-face interactions.

References

Antheunis, M. L., Schouten, A. P., & Krahmer, E. (2016). The role of social networking sites in early adolescents’ social lives. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 36(3), 348-371.

Baym, N., Zhang, Y., Kunkel, A., Ledbetter, A., & Lin, M. (2007). Relational quality and media use in interpersonal relationships. New Media & Society, 9(5), 735–752. doi: 10.1177/1461444807080339.

Bobkowski, P., & Smith, J. (2013). Social media divide characteristics of emerging adults who do not use social network websites. Media, Culture & Society, 35(6), 771-781.

Elder, A. (2014). Excellent online friendships: An Aristotelian defense of social media. Ethics and Information Technology, 16(4), 287-297.

Kaliarnta, S. (2016). Using Aristotle’s theory of friendship to classify online friendships: a critical counterview. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(2), 65-79.

Marlowe, J. M., Bartley, A., & Collins, F. (2017). Digital belongings: The intersections of social cohesion, connectivity, and digital media. Ethnicities, 17(1), 85-102.

Niland, P., Lyons, A. C., Goodwin, I., & Hutton, F. (2015). Friendship work on Facebook: Young adults’ understandings and practices of friendship. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 25(2), 123-137.

Vallor, S. (2012). Flourishing on facebook: virtue friendship & new social media. Ethics and Information technology, 14(3), 185-199.

Van Schalkwyk, G. I., Marin, C. E., Ortiz, M., Rolison, M., Qayyum, Z., McPartland, J. C., & Silverman, W. K. (2017). Social Media Use, Friendship Quality, and the Moderating Role of Anxiety in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 47(9), 2805-2813.

Are All Identities Presented Online Real? Identifying Managed Identities within Virtual Online Communities

Are All Identities Presented Online Real? Identifying Managed Identities within Virtual Online Communities

Jack Walton

Curtin University

ABSTRACT:

This paper explores several published articles that argue how one’s identity has been formed online and how it is represented within virtual communities. Hodkinson (2015) goes into depth about how young millennials express their personal identities (of which sexting is a component) online and contribute to some of the consequences that can go with it. This then leads to the question, are all identities expressed in online communities necessarily real? This paper will use these references to back up the point that online social media platforms and communities can lead to a world of managed identities or identities that cannot always be represented in the physical world.

Introduction

Throughout modern society, virtual online communities have become dominant in many peoples (particularly millennials) lives. “Virtual communities and social network sites are becoming ubiquitous among those who communicate via the internet” (Porter, 2015, p.161). Many people form their identities within these virtual communities and these can be either real, completely fake or somewhere in between. This paper will argue that whilst the virtual world gives you the freedom to explore your identity, it can lead to a world of managed identities or an identity that cannot be fully expressed in the real world. It will argue that millennials are focusing on virtual online communities to gain popularity within their circle of friends and peers in their real lives; life is generally full of both positivity and negativity, however, most of the time, young millennials only post the positive aspects of their life on social media. This paper will examine some of the major consequences that can come from this anomaly. It will also examine the different types of virtual communities that can enable users to construct an identity of their choice.

Keywords: millennials, identity, communities, virtual

Discussion

“Online community is composed of members sharing common interests” (Zhou, 2011, p.3). Ever since Web 2.0 was formed, millennials in particular have been relying on virtual social media communities to prove their personal identities to their peers. “Participation in online cultures of sharing and interaction via social media is becoming increasingly … compulsory among groups of young people” (Robards, 2014 in Hodkinson, 2015 p.2). Donath (1999, p.N/A) makes it clear that in reality, there is an inherent unity to the self, the human body is something that is strongly connected to our personal identities. Once users have signed up to a social media platform, they begin constructing an online identity, which can be real, something in between or completely false. Boyd (2007, p.13) makes it clear that the common-sense approach to an online identity is to express the most noticeable or important aspects of identity and to leave others to interpret. This generally means that only the positive aspects of our personal identities will be expressed online. Whilst we do this in real life to some extent, the difference with online communities is the extent to which these profiles can be “managed” often as the user is often exaggerating/boasting about how optimistic their life is, when in fact the reality of life is that it is full of ups and downs.

In general, one must constantly update one’s profile or statuses within the social media platform if one wants to maintain a positive image to one’s peers. Forman, Kern and Gil-Egui (2012) make it clear that individual identities are part of the formation of an online community; hence bringing people who share similar interests together. These communities can be further expanded with more members joining. Within an online community, “Identification requires individual members to maintain an active relationship with other community members” (Zhou, 2011, p.8). This means that one must make an effort to keep up to date with what is going on in the community and they have to understand “group goals, values and conventions when they join a community” (Zhou 2011, p.8). Hence, there is peer pressure to comment on or update members of the community. This pressure can sometimes lead to the building up of a contrived image.

Numerous studies have explored the relationships between millennials and the digital world as well as the impact it has had on them. Hodkinson (2015) raises the analogy of the “virtual teenage bedroom” and argues how social network communities have influenced (or deceived) their identities. “Social network sites retain intimacy and the individual-centred format continues to facilitate the exhibition and mapping of identities” (Hodkinson, 2015, p.1). In today’s generation, many millenials feel the need to express a different (managed) identity on social media platforms (most notably Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat) to make themselves fit in to their peer communities and to gain likes. This is further backed up by O’Keefe and Clarke-Pearson (2011) who go into depth about the reasons and risks behind teenagers’ virtual identities. “Because of their limited capacity for self-regulation and susceptibility to peer pressure, children and adolescents are at some risk as they navigate and experiment with social media” (O’Keefe and Clarke-Pearson, 2011, p.800). Physical communities such as school, sport clubs or other extra-curricular activities can influence these different identities online. For example, a young millennial Facebook user may constantly add photos of positive events that happen in their life (such as outings or travels) to gain likes. This results in making their life look like it is perfect all the time. Posting negative status’ will not gain them any attention from their peers because the key communication tool is the “like” button.

As likes seem to be very important (and competitive) to some adolescents during their high school days, creating overly positive identity representations online is a way for them to gain more likes and followers. This has led to major issues since the 2010’s era, including cyber-bullying or, worse, suicide in teenagers. This is further backed up by Gross (2017) who goes into depth about the issue of sexting and cyber bullying and the major effects it has had on millennials. According to Gross (2017), likes are so important to the point that some girls feel the need to post explicit pictures of themselves online to gain “popularity” approval from their peers. Even though Gross’s article focuses on young females posting these images, boys are just as guilty too. Based on this research at least initially young millennials inadvertently create this “superior” image of themselves, which, in many cases, because of the competitive nature of a peer group can result in peers ending up being envious of them.

The competiveness within school and communities can have a large impact on teenagers and how they choose to present their identities often ultimately resulting in sexting. Mascheroni, Vincent and Jiminez (2015) discusses this false idea of identity and how “constructing an autonomous identity is a fundamental task for adolescents and pre-adolescents.” Mascheroni, Vincent and Jiminez (2015) makes it clear that in young girls particularly, exposing the human body is seen as a way to attract “likes” and “followers” on social media platforms. “Girls post pictures consistent with conformist beauty standards to avoid being marginalised” (Mascheroni, Vincent and Jiminez, 2015, p.N/A). This suggests that many young girls are feeling insecure about their social lives and they feel that gaining a certain number of likes will help them “fit in” with their peers in their middle/high school community. Selfies are also seen as a major form of visual communication between young teens. To gain more Facebook “likes” from their classmates, a school student may have docked a profile picture (make themselves look skinnier, more attractive etc.). In the minds of these young adolescents “the number of likes they receive on their profiles is understood as an indicator of their inclusion in the peer group” (Mascheroni, Vincent and Jiminez, 2015, p.N/A). They have “incorporated selfies in the process of exploring their identity and as a means of “presentation, representation and embodiment” (Mascheroni, Vincent and Jiminez, 2015, p.N/A). Mascheroni, Vincent and Jiminez (2015) also make it clear that whilst they may gain many likes from this false identity, it raises the question about cyber bullying and how this can have a major effect on these young millennials lives. “While cyber sexual bullying is called many names: sexting, online sexual bullying, or generally cyber bullying, they all refer to the same activity –sending nude or semi-nude photographs through the internet (Gross, 2017, p.557). It also reinforces a loss of identity within the young person as they are feeling the need to change themselves to gain attention from peers online. Furthermore, virtual communities (in this instance, social media communities such as Facebook and Instagram) can tie in with real life communities (schools and sporting clubs). For example, bullying may initiate online where identities can be hidden but read by real friends from school. This bullying can then extend in to the playground in real life. Likewise, bullying at school can be extended to online bullying.

Within online dating communities, another example of changing identities is where people can customise their own profiles as well as doctor their own images to get attention from other people all over the world. Gibbs (2010) refers to this as warranting. “Warranting refers to the capacity to draw a reliable connection between a presented persona online and a corporeally-anchored person in the physical world (Walther, 2009, p.232 in Gibbs, 2010, p.74). Online dating can also consist of both real and fake profiles. According to Norcie and De Cristofaro (2013, p.N/A), “a user could set up a fake social network profile, link it to her [or his] ODS profile and “Certifeye” it.” This means one can create a false profile, pretending to be someone else and it can seem legitimate. Rege (2009) explores the idea of fake online identities and how people scam others around the world. “Romance scams are international in scope and no centralised database tracking victims and their losses are currently available” (King and Thomas, 2009 in Rege 2009, p.495). Even though this paper was written in 2009, tracing devices are still not available. Such scams are, however, understood to be significant in leading to many disturbing consequences for the victims. Online dating can be seen as a sub-category of sexting. When a user gets more and more comfortable with somebody they have met online, they may feel the need to send explicit images of themselves to their new found virtual partner (even if they are not fully aware if the relationship is real or not).

One major consequence from online dating, managed identities and sexting is mental health issues such as depression and anxiety which can further lead to tragic events such as suicide. Wensley and Campbell (2012, p.650) make it clear that cyber bullying can come in many different forms such as “sending nasty e-mails or text messages, creating insulting websites dedicated to an individual, or posting hurtful or embarrassing pictures online.” All of these forms of cyber bullying can have a significant impact on one’s mental health leading to tragedy. A more significant suicide was the death of an American girl Jessica Logan in 2008. According to No Bullying (2017), Logan sent a nude photo of herself to her boyfriend. However, the image was sent to many teenagers in several different high schools in the Cincinnati area (once the couple broke up). The cyber bullying continued through several different social media platforms which caused Logan to take her life. According to No Bullying (2017), another major suicide that sparked social media in 2012 was the death of British Columbian Amanda Todd. An image of Todd’s breasts exposed went viral on several different social media platforms causing her to be bullied from classmates, hence she had to move schools several times. Months later however, she took her own life. Mental health issues have been a major concern for millennials (and in some cases older generations) over cyber bullying and online harassment and there have been many attempts between governments to stop this. However, to date, they have not been successful.

Conclusion

This paper has discussed how our virtual identity is constructed influenced by the online community. It demonstrates how initially our identity is influenced by a desire for likes. This leads to an overly positive identity that can not be lived up to in real life. This can lead to a sense of a lack of fulfilment in oneself as well as in jealousy of peers. The pressure to stay connected to these online communities can also have a negative impact of one’s self esteem. The competitive nature of these communities can lead to sexting and bullying which can transfer into the real world especially in confined environments such as schools. Bullying and sexting can be devastating and can lead to depression and even suicide.

References

Donath, J. (1999) ‘Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community’, London: Routledge. Retrieved from: http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html

Forman, A. E. Kern, R. and Gil-Egui, G. (2012). Death and mourning as sources of community participation in online social networks: R.I.P pages in Facebook. First Monday 17(9), http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3935/3288

Gibbs, J., Ellison, N.B. and Lai, C. ‘First Comes Love, Then Comes Google: An Investigation of Uncertainty Reduction Stratagies and Self-Disclosure in Online Dating.’ https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210377091

Gross, M. (2017). Cyber sexual bullying,“sexting” in schools, and the growing need to educate the youth. The University of the Pacific Law Review, 48(3), 555-574. Retrieved from: http://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uoplawreview/vol48/iss3/11

Hodkinson, P. (2015) ‘Bedrooms and Beyond: Youth, Identity and Privacy on Social Network Sites’, New Media and Society, online before print, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815605454

Mascheroni, G. Vincent, J. and Jiminez, E. (2015). “Girls are addicted to likes so they post semi-nakend selfies”: Peer mediation, normativity and the construction of identity online. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2015-1-5

No Bullying (2017). “Jessica Logan – The Rest of the Story”. Retrieved from: http://nobullying.com/jessica-logan/

No Bullying (2017). “The Unforgettable Amanda Todd story”. Retrieved from: https://nobullying.com/amanda-todd-story/

Norcie, G., De Cristofaro, E., & Bellotti, V. (2013, April). Bootstrapping trust in online dating: Social verification of online dating profiles. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 149-163). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Retrieved from: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.4155.pdf

O’Keefe, G. and Clarke-Pearson, K. (2011) ‘Clinical Report – The Impact of Social Media on Children, Adolescents, and Families. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-0054

Porter, C. E. (2015). Virtual communities and social networks. In L. Cantoni and J. A. Danowski, (eds). Communication and Technology. Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 161 – 179

Rege, A. (2009). What’s love got to do with it? Exploring online dating scams and identity fraud. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 3(2), 494. Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/openview/75ff9576e029c3f25473da1b53790d9d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=55114

Zhou, T. (2011). Understanding online community user participation: a social influence perspective. Internet research, 21(1), 67-81. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241111104884

LiveJournal’s use of anonymity and its place in online social networks

Rachel M.Winship

Curtin University

Abstract

This paper sheds light on blogging social network site (SNS) LiveJournal, which has been operating since 1999. It was one of the first popular mainstream blogging services which focused on replicating diary entries. While originally popularised in the United States, LiveJournal is now currently most popular throughout Russia. It does operate in other countries but for the purpose of this paper, the focus will be on Russia. The specific age group being referred to throughout this paper is youth/teens. I argue that LiveJournal’s mainstream success is due to the fact that its users have always had the option to be anonymous and operate under pseudonyms instead of real names. The absence of real names allows for online identity play through blog posts and interactions within the LiveJournal online community.

Introduction

Technology is woven tightly throughout our lives in the 21st century and has changed how we live them. As leading psychologist Sherry Turkle says “through technology, we create, navigate, and perform our emotional lives” (Turkle, 2011). “Some of the largest changes we are facing as a society are cultural, changes to our social world and the way we interact with one another” (Levitin, 2014, p.120). We now do a large percentage of interpersonal communication with people in our lives through online platforms. We create our identity now not only face to face with people but online in social networks as well. Figuring out our place of identity in these social networks allows experimentation (Pearson, 2009). Offline when creating identity you might hold back parts of yourself in case of face to face rejection. While online in social networks, you have the option in most cases of anonymity in creating a pseudonym. Social nework site platforms provide areas which are disembodied mediated and controllable, and through which alternate performances can be displayed to others (Pearson 2009). Freindster popularised the features that define social network sites – profiles, public testimoials or comments, and publicly articulated, traverable lists of friends. (boyd, 2007, p.4) On social network site (SNS) platforms the online performative space is a deliberately playful space (Pearson, 2009). “The fluidity and self-concious platforms of performance allow individuals and networks of users to play with aspects of their presentations of self, and the relationship of those online selves to others without inadvertently risking privacy” (Pearson, 2009). Communities are a social group of any size whose members reside in a specific locality, share government, and often have a common cultural and historical heritage (Dictionary.com, 2018). Online or vitual communities are a group of people who interact via internet Web sites, chat rooms, newsgroups, email, discussion boards, or forum (Dictionary.com, 2018). Online worlds provide rich grounds for experimentation with identity, and falsification is not uncommon; 25 percent of teen boys and 30 percent of teen girls say they have posted false information about themselves online, most commonly their age (Reed, 2014). LiveJournal is one social network platform that encourages anonymity in creating a pseudonyms. The SNS is an originally American and now Russian social networking service that allows users to keep a blog, journal or diary (LiveJournal, 2018). The option of anonymity on blog platform LiveJournal, can protect users security while enabling them to participate freely in the online social network (Nagel & Frith, 2015).

LiveJournal and the history of blogging

LiveJournal essentially looks and works much like other blogging sites, where the entry or posts made by the journal owner are arranged in chronological order (Raynes-Goldie, 2004). There is a link to leave and read comments for each post, where the user can read comments left (Raynes-Goldie, 2004). One of the appealing aspects which sets liveJournal apart from other blogging services is the users profile page. Every user has a journal, username and profile page (Raynes-Goldie, 2004). The profile page is where the user can input things like their interests, profile picture, contact information, etc (Raynes-Goldie, 2004). The profile picture does not have to be an exact photo of the person, which is one way they can choose anonymity. Another way they can choose to be anonymous is through their username. Unlike Facebook, whose terms and conditions require their users to use their real name, LiveJournal allows their users to choose their online identity. This is an appealing feature for people who may want more than one online identity in fear of things such as; security, judgement or scrutiny about their journal entries or interactions, from friends, family or people they know offline. By creating a profile, LiveJournal allows its users to link their blogs and identities together so that they can create and build reputations based on their journals as well as their comments and networks of friends (Raynes-Goldie, 2004). Services such as LiveJournal allow their users to specify who their “friends” are, and thus a social network is formed (MacKinnon & Warren, 2007).

LiveJournal was created in April 1999, by an American programmer named Brad Fitzpatrick. He created it as a way of keeping his friends up to date with his daily activities (LiveJournal, 2018). It reached immediate popularity and success which meant that it also became more than just one person could handle to operate (LiveJournal, 2018). There were other mainstream social networking sites around the first few years of LiveJournal’s service, like Friendster and then Myspace, but the premise of them was a little different to LiveJournal. With Friendster there was a heavier focus on meeting friends “on the premise that people were separated by six degrees” (CBS News). This was a feature that showed how you were connected to strangers and made meeting people less intimidating (CBS News). On Myspace, which is where many people from Friendster migrated to, they were known for customizable profiles, band pages and portraying who your top eight friends are. Whereas LiveJournal’s aim was and still is to blur the lines between blogging and social networking (LiveJournal, 2018). According to their own website LiveJournal is “home to a wide array of creative individuals looking to share common interests, meet new friends, and express themselves. LiveJournal encourages communal interaction and personal expression by offering a user-friendly interface and a deeply customizable journal” (LiveJournal, 2018).

Over the last two decades, the rapid adoption of social network sites had scholars begin to study their importance among teens and young adults (boyd, 2007, p.1). As boyd pointed out in an article, a large part of why many teens may use social networks is due to restrictions on access to public life that make it difficult for young people to be socialised into society at large (boyd, 2007, p.19). Restrictions on acess to public life may come from their parents or adults around them who believe that restrictions are necessary to prevent problematic behaviours (boyd, 2007, p.19). boyd argues that while social interaction can and does take place in private environments, the challenges of social interaction in public life is a part of what help youth grow (boyd, 2007, p.19). Boyd says “American society has a very peculiar relationship to teenagers – and children in general. They are simultaneously idealised and demonized; adults fear them but they also seek to protect them. On the one hand, there has been a rapid rise in curfew legislation to curb teen violence and loitering laws are used to bar teens from hanging out on street corners, parking lots, or other outdoor meeting places for fear of the trouble they might cause. On the other hand, parents are restricting their youth fom hanging out in public spaces for fear of predators, drug dealers, and gangs. Likewise, while adults spend countless hours socializing over alcohol, minors are not oonly restricted from drinking but also from socializing in many venues where alcohol is served” (boyd, 2007, p.19). With an ongoing culture of fear surrounding youth behaviour, the end result is youth having little access to public spaces (boyd, 2007, p.19). The following statement provides insight into boyd’s argument with an example from fifteen year old Traviesa; “My [guardian] is really strict so if I get to go anywhere, it’s a big miracle. So I talk to people on MySpace…I know she means well, I know she doesn’t want me to mess up. But sometimes you need to mess up to figure out that you’re doing it wrong. You need mistakes to know where you’re going. You need to figure things out for yourself” (boyd, 2007, p.19). A main motivation for users of online social networks is that it is a space which their parents or authoritative figures usually aren’t aware of. They are spaces where they can explore, socialize and express themselves exploring their identities.

Dear Diary: Community and LiveJournal

A diary is known to be a safe space for most, a place where a person can articulate their private thoughts and define their position in relation to others and the world at large (Dijck, 2004). Before people expressed their thoughts online, diary entires would probably only be read by another person if they had a close relationship. With the shift of sharing private interpersonal conversations, it is natural that a population of people online would want to share something deeper than what the testimonial and comment sections of Friendster and Myspace offered. For people who craved somewhere that they could share their thoughts, feelings, creativity and still function as their own version of a “community” (Lindemann, 2006). Although users may not use their real names and opt to use a pseudonym, the sentiments expressed through users comments on another users diary entry doesn’t make them any less valid. As Kurt Lindemann states “often, a communicatively artistic journal entry can make a reader feel personally connected to the author” (Lindemann, 2006, p.357). Before platforms like LiveJournal, communities involved in blogging were not likely to be very large or accessible to everyone because blogging required considerable technical skill and patience (Raynes-Goldie, 2004). Now with platforms like LiveJournal, blogging is easily accessible. LiveJournal is not restricted to blogging functions, but also integrates community tools in its functions, creating an online social network (Raynes-Goldie, 2004).

Identity and anonymity debate

There has been much debate between not only scholars but tech companies, who embrace what has been called the “real name” internet, versus those who embrace anonymity. Most of the debate about anonymity versus real names focuses on two related areas: trolling and safety (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Because the early internet sites relied almost solely on textual cues, there was little attempt to fix identity to one’s body (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Whereas LiveJournal exists in an internet era where many internet users are faced with the decision of how they want to portray themselves online. If they present their offline identity, including their real name and photo, they may not be able to fully express or engage with different identities for fears of “context collapse” that come with using “real names” (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Context collapse is when “social media technologies collapse multiple audiences into single contexts, making it difficult for people to use the same techniques online that they do to handle multiplicity in face-to-face conversation (Marwick & boyd, 2011). Another definition of context collapse is that broadly, it refers to how people, information, and norms from one context seep into the bounds of another (Davis & Jurgeson, 2014, p.477). Social psychologists argue that we come to know ourselves by seeing what we do and how others react to us, and that through interaction, we seek to maintain the identity meanings associated with each role (Davis & Jurgeson, 2014, p.478). Within Socia Media platforms, a persons diverse networks have the potential to converge into a single mass, requireing the user to have all of their identities engaging simultaneously with family, colleages, and drinking buddies, each of whom harbours different views of who the actor is, and different interactional and performative expectations. (Davis & Jurgeson, 2014, p. 478).

Scholars such as Bernie Hogan and danah boyd have argued that pseudonymity can protect users’ security while enabling them to participate freely online without the fears of “context collapse” which comes with using real names (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Hogan’s example explores the benefits of pseudonymity when he writes about a woman wanting to write ideologically on a blog but may not want her role as a supposedly objective Wikipedia editor to be damaged by her other, less neutral writings (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). His argument is that someone can be both a liberal writer and a neutral editor who follows wikipedia’s rules; one aspect of the self is not more “authentic” than another (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Expanding on this idea, if a woman was to have dinner or go out with friends, her conversation or presentation of self might be very different to the one she portrays to her family the next day. People in day to day life present different versions of themselves which are bound to that situation or context. Perhaps the most powerful point in the decision to segment one’s online identity is that it becomes a safe and secure place to discuss complex and controversial issues (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). For example Gay youths who cannot come out to their offline community may want to find people to talk to on blogging or social networking sites. Another example is teachers who may want a public-facing profile but also want privacy as they interact on other sites (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Government or other public service job employees may also want the privacy of interacting on other sites. Others may want to engage in niche communities on sites like Reddit without their Facebook friends knowing; and many people want to share political views without impacting their careers (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Danah boyd, is one of the most prominent academic critics of the argument that the “real name” internet makes online activity safer. On the contrary she believes that “real name policies aren’t empowering; they’re an authoritarian assertion of power over vulnerable people” (boyd, 2011). Boyd points out that there are many viable reasons to segment one’s identity online that have nothing to do with harassing people or acting uncivilly in the comments sections.

Trolling and doxing

Of course the flip side of all the good that comes with anonymity is the fact that there is room for trolling. Trolling is something which will not be going away anytime soon, and that has been around at least as long as people have been communicating on the internet (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Trolling is when people intentionally post content designed to incite an emotional reaction in its audience (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015). Trolling is generally a main point of contention for people who support the real name movement on the internet. People who support the real name movement claim that by doing so it is a proactive way to minimise trolls. However trolls still find ways to exist and be seen implying that attempting to force users to use real names still results in the unwanted trolls. Their aim is to be provocative and attempt to be shocking, agrue with users and engage in being verbally abusive. More advanced form of trolling has advanced to what is called doxing. This phenomenon involves groups of anonymous or pseudonymous users researching an individual and then publishing identifiable facts about that person. (Van Der Nagel & Firth, 2015) People claim this is for social good, exposing information about people involved in certain things someone else may not agree with. However people do this act for things that they decide is against a belief they hold.

Conclusion

As discussed in this paper, the option of anonymityon the blog platform LiveJournal, can protect users security while enabling them to participate freely in the online social network (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015). Although there is a current debate between the “real name” internet versus anonymity of internet users, through the use of anonymity on LiveJournal, people are able to protect their offline identities, while expressing themselves on the platform. A user is at risk for context collapse if they only use their real name when on SNS platforms. LiveJournal’s use of anonymity create’s a space where there is little risk of context collapse. Users of the LiveJournal service are able to be vulnerable and socially connected with each other while still protecting any sensitive information shared online. The users are also empowered by who they choose to share their information with, as they can make their journal entries private or share with users of their choosing.

References

Boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume.Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

Levitin J. D. (2014). The Organized mind: Thinking Straight in the Age of Information Overload. 2014

Davis, J., & Jurgenson, N. (2013). Context collapse: theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society. 476-485. https://www-tandfonline-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/1369118X.2014.888458?needAccess=true

Diaz, C., Troncoso, C., & Serjantov, A. (2008, July). On the impact of social network profiling on anonymity. In International Symposium on Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium44-62. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Dijck, J. V. (2004). FCJ-012 Composing the Self: Of Diaries and Lifelogs. The Fibreculturejournal. Digital Media + Networks + Transdiciplinary Critique. Issue 3. University of Amsterdam. http://three.fibreculturejournal.org/fcj-012-composing-the-self-of-diaries-and-lifelogs/

Freitas, D. The Happiness Effect: How Social Media is Driving a Generation to appear

Greenall, R. (2012). LiveJournal: Russia’s unlikely internet giant. BBC News.

Hill, K. (2011). Digital Anthropologist. https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/focus-danah-boyd-ethnographer-facebook-digital-anthropologist.html#30b4d2d77866

Johansson, E. (2014). Blogging in Russia: The blog platform LiveJournal as a professional tool for Russian journalists. Baltic Worlds, 7(2-3), 27-36.

Koltsova, O., & Koltcov, S. (2013). Mapping the public agenda with topic modeling: The case of the Russian livejournal. Policy & Internet, 5(2), 207-227.

Lindemann, K. (2005). Live (s) online: Narrative performance, presence, and community in LiveJournal.com.Text and Performance Quarterly, 25(4), 354-372.

LiveJournal FAQ: How did LiveJournal get started? Who runs it now?. Retrieved April 2018 https://www.livejournal.com/support/faq/4.html

MacKinnon, I., & Warren, R. H. (2007). Age and geographic inferences of the LiveJournal social network. In Statistical Network Analysis: Models, Issues, and New Directions(pp. 176-178). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Marwick, A. E & boyd, d. (2011). I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media Society.13. 114-133.

McLellan, K. V. (2006). “LiveJournal is a Conversation With the World”: An examination of the effects of interpersonal communication on personal blogging. Unpublished master thesis, University of Chicago.

Pearson, E. (2009). All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks. First Monday.14(3).http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2162/2127

Pearson, E. (2010). Making a good (virtual) first impression: The use of visuals in online impression management and creating identity performances. In What kind of information society? Governance, virtuality, surveillance, sustainability, resilience (pp. 118-130). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Sherry, T. (2011). Alone Together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. http://alonetogetherbook.com

Shmatikov, V. (2011). Anonymity is not privacy: technical perspective. Communications of the ACM,54(12), 132-132.

Then and now: a history of social networking sites. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/then-and-now-a-history-of-social-networking-sites/4/

Growing Up In The Social Network

Abstract: This paper explores the role that online communities and the social network play in the development and implementing of identity from adolescents through to young adults. This is done primarily through the analysis of the various features and benefits of platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Blogger as well contributing factors to identity development such as community design. Various identity theories are also briefly explored to allow for an understanding of how identity development in the Web 2.0 era is changing for adolescents and young adults and becoming a key determinant in the sustainability of online communities and networks.

Keywords: social networks; community; social media; identity; Facebook; Instagram; Blogger; community design; identity theory

As online communities and networks expand and the number of adolescents accessing the internet continue to increase (Johnson, 2006), the role that Web 2.0 communities play in developing and implementing identity online and offline is becoming commodious. Communication is a key driving source for why and how we utilise social networks. Donath (1996) states that communication is essential for evaluating an interaction and that knowing the identity of whom we are communicating with is also essential; however, she also notes that identity can be ambiguous. In the physical world we can link our identity to our physical bodies, whereas online our identities are linked to the pictures and words we choose to post. For young people, being exposed to a multitude of content on a regular basis, during a time where their identity and self-awareness is developing, can be overwhelming but also formative of their personalities, values, attitudes and beliefs as well as how they interact in communities both online and offline. Throughout this paper I will be arguing that social networks and communities are important platforms for the growth of identity in young people in the developing digital era. I will be doing this by analyzing the features and benefits of different platforms including Instagram, Facebook and Blogger, as well as interpreting the ways in which social networks develop communities and how these communities and networks are relevant to the identities of their users.

Building Communities and Community Identities on Social Networks

The internet, and now the rise of social networks, allows social humans the ability to learn, connect, educate, share and influence. As Papacharissi (2011) explains, networks exist to spread knowledge and that we live in an information network that continuously expands out to other users. Through these information networks, one can develop their online identity. For children who are only just beginning to form a concept of their own identity, the new multimodal forms of learning (Burke, 2013) which consist of both virtual playgrounds and school playgrounds give children great opportunity in exploration of others and themselves. Chatrooms and online video games are lending the features of avatars and anonymity at a young age and utilizing ‘play’ to create community and engagement (Burke, 2013). Buckingham and Willet (2006) analyse the online community consisting of ‘gURLs,’ which they define to be female tech savvy web users and creators that empower their thoughts and interests through their online platforms and through features of blogging websites such as text and banners; it is considered a space where girls can speak their own language and develop their online presence and identity. There are many different communities out their depending on an individual’s identity or their interests and the various digital platforms, such as online games and blogs give users the ability to express themselves through narrative and images.

Influence, whether it be from mass media created content or convergence culture within social networks, is another defining factor of identity online as much of the content one submerges themselves in is user-generated, or mass media generated, changing the inner values or desires of the user, therefore altering the content they wish to post which then in turn alters their online persona. Online communities thrive based on their community design, something that is prevalent amongst social media platforms, most recognizably on Facebook and Instagram. Design affects how people interact and how they influence one another and even the user’s interests, based on the content that they are exposed to. The design and interaction that user’s come into contact with on these platforms is what ultimately makes them want to continue using them; they may feel a sense of belonging or community or they may feel influenced or motivated by the design of the platforms to continue logging in and creating content and having an online identity. Ren, Kraut and Kielser (2007), explore the difference between identity-based attachment and bond-based attachment, these are essentially the reasons why people continue to be a part of particular communities. If you have an identity-based attachment, you become a part of and stay in the group because you identify with the group as whole; whereas bond-based attachment refers to a singular connection with an individual in the group. These two identity characteristics along with community design are dominant determinants of identity development and community construction.

Despite being one of the biggest social media platforms in the world, Papacharissi (2011) does not see platforms such as Facebook as communities but rather as social venues where communities come to meet. So what makes a community? The ability to socialize, create meaningful connections to others, provide entertainment, and allow for support and empathy to be put out into the online space are all building blocks of a community online. When you log on to Facebook the page reads: “Facebook helps you connect and share with people in your life.” This means hat you can bring your offline ommunity online but Facebook allows for this and so much more; you can now connect with people you do not know, businesses, celebrities, charities and whatever else resonates with you as an individual, which all helps to build your profile even larger.

With youths being such a heavy part of our online communities, it is unsurprising that many of them have taken up another aspect of online community collaboration, or remix culture. There are entire genre communities on platforms such as Blogger and YouTube that allow creative liberty to their users, whether it be in the form of mash-ups or through the creation of memes. These forms of creation constitute significant cultural, social, technological, and learning behaviors (Ahn et al., 2013) and as the digital sphere continues to develop it is not surprising that digital culture, along with its remixing and remediation, is becoming a part of the everyday lives of young users. As teachers urge their students to participate in class, adolescents may be just as motivated to be a part of the participatory culture taking place online. It is strongly argued also that youths cannot possibly gather the knowledge of permissive copying practices when in fact studies have found that children as young as five years old develop concepts like having ideas and voicing negative reactions to copying (Ahn et al. 2013). Essentially, this is evidence of how youths can begin developing their core understandings and values and how they can be integrated into the online social networks that they will both contribute and interact in as they develop.

You can put a definition on to what one believes community means, however the widespread nodes of the internet have allowed communities and henceforth individual users to define themselves as whatever they want to be. There is something for everyone. Young people are increasingly going online, whether to escape reality or to establish their identity in the social network. In 2004 Slater explores the idea of disembodiment from identity, that perhaps users are detaching themselves from their bodies which contains the benefits of textuality and anonymity; you can be whoever you want to be, and nobody has to know that it is you, if you do not want them to.

Factors of Online Communities that Influence Online Identity

Of course our identity is firmly rooted in where we geographically come from and the cultural norms that have intrinsically shaped our values, attitudes and beliefs throughout our lives. In connection to the online sphere and social networks one can see how geographic location can impact the development of building communities online; in China, online social networkers use different platforms as compared to western users, this is primarily a result of the restrictions on internet usage but also, many of the platforms that they use such as Weibo and WeChat are designed to be appreciated by these culturally relevant users as they are utilised not only by Chinese influencers and brands but they are largely utilised across the country. If everyone in you know is Weibo then you too will most likely use Weibo to talk to them. Other cultural factors of online communities can be interests, typically music or photography; religious values and beliefs as well as the user’s propensity for privacy. How much a user wishes to share about themselves or their online identity depends entirely upon the user. Facebook does not require their users to fill out all of their profile characteristics, but rather what you want people to see. This can then be further manipulated based on the user’s security preferences. There are now so many different platforms out there to be explored by youth today based on individual factors, such as age, location and interests. For example, anyone can make a Musically account, where you film yourself parodying songs that you like or are culturally relevant in the moment. These videos can then be shared to Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube and depending on the audience of your profile, enjoyed. Popularity of specific applications and platforms is generated from use, inviting friends via the platform, and word-of-mouth. Boyd (2007) found that teens admire the ability to visualize how their social world would look through their networked collection of profiles; they can visualize all of their friends online so they would in turn want their friends to visualize them.

Taking a look at Facebook, approximately 940,000 users in Australia are between the ages of thirteen and seventeen and with Instagram approximately 1 in 3 Australian’s are users (Cowling, 2018). These are fast becoming prime platforms for young people to begin building their online identities and join online communities. These platforms have been so successful as a result of their customizability. The notion of building your own profile including a profile picture, facts about yourself and your interests and then hyperlinks to your other profiles and platforms is once again of interest to a wide range of internet users. It is appealing because you can make your profile accurate to your offline profile or you can live your fantasy and take on the identity of whoever you please. Young users are wanting their profiles to reflect their interests and who they are and by giving youth the opportunity to share this journey with their peers it may make it easier for other young people to help form their identities, when they may be struggling with who they want to be and who they want to be seen as online. Teens and young adults often face the question of ‘who am I?’ With a vast array of environments, knowledge networks and social networks, users aren’t limited and they can explore different customs, societies and interests without fear of being reprimanded or put down which they may fear in their offline life.

The way in which communities formed online impact one’s identity, sense of self, or sense of purpose online can be seen as a reflection of how users interact online and how they build their profiles. Social networking sites are, like we explored before, social venues where users can come to gather. A private community may require a user to apply to join; the private group can then assess the user’s profile to see if they would be an appropriate participant for their group. A private community can be created through a private Facebook page or Instagram profile (that uses hashtags and private messaging to communicate and share) or it can be created through blogging platforms such as Blogger, WordPress and Tumblr which can put passwords on their user’s blogs, and can be only be accessed if the site owner gives you their password. Private communities such as these are useful tools for young users and content creators to be a part of the current phenomenon of whatever platform is currently trending yet it also allows for their safety when sharing their profiles online. Private communities are often policed or monitored closely to watch for bullying and negativity and with most users having a shared common interest there may not be any space for poor behaviour. An example of this would stem from community Facebook pages. High schools, universities and suburbs can have their own profiles where offline community participants can congregate online to voice their thoughts or share events. Facebook has the feature of a group mediator whom has the ability to add and remove users from the profiles, as well as delete comments and images if they infringe on the set rules, which the feature of pinned posts/notices is useful. Public communities, whilst harder to monitor, may also allow for more freedom in terms of self-expression and content creation, even if that does include remixing. Both of these communities need participation, content and discussion to maintain their relevancy and the more the platforms allow their users to share about themselves, the bigger they grow.

Creative and Emotional Privacy for Young Internet Users

Being a participant in online communities and of social media has become almost a compulsory act for teens and young people who are wanting to engage within the sphere of their universe, but what is it costing them (Hodkinson, 2015)? Hodkinson (2015) uses the analogy of the bedroom like that of an online space or profile for a young user; it is about ownership of space or having something of one’s own. These users are bearing all to people they do not know in offline in their safe spaces but who is to know if these spaces really are safe. I think that in an atmosphere where an individual can fully be themselves, it is important to them that the interaction that they receive on their pages or content is appeasing to them. Young people could always have more urgency towards their safety as a result of internet predators. We must think of these online spaces as teens think of their bedrooms; as a private space for them to be themselves, artistically or emotionally, and trust that they would not interact with potentially sour trolls online.

There is a sense of territory, particularly on spaces such as Blogger, where almost everything is customizable; ownership and territory are not limited to young users, however it is increasingly important that we come to acknowledge the creative and emotional importance of these spaces, rather than limit what young users can do, explain how they can protect themselves whilst also having their own space online, just as one would do if they were to rent or buy a home offline.

As social networks expand to hold multiple purposes for its users, whether it be for information, communication, content creation, business and economic purposes and even for emotional expression and connection to the world, it is important to recognize that digital media and social media communities are becoming a part of growing up and identity development. Through the establishment of both private and public communities online, on platforms such as Instagram, Facebook and Blogger; people now have access to a variety of ways in which they can build and expand upon their online profiles. There are new ways for them to explore the type of content that they want to put their name to and a variety of ways for them to remain safe whilst doing it. Overall, identity can be developed and expressed through the features and allowances of digital media platforms and communities can be built online based off these identities. Online communities are there to help engage users, create discussion and develop bonds and social network identities are explorative of how we as users wish for others to understand our online presence; they can help to create friendships, reinforce or explore cultural values and societal norms and can influence our overall interests therefore shaping our identities and the communities that we are a part of.

References:

Ahn, J. , Subramaniam, M. , Fleischmann, K.R., Waugh, A. , Walsh, G. and Durin, A. (2012). Youth identities as remixers in an online community of storytellers: Attitudes, strategies and values. Proc. Am. Soc. Infor. Sci. Tech., 49:1-10. doi:10.1002/meet.14504901089

Boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume. Cambridge, MA.: MIT PRESS.

http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf

Buckingham, D & Willett, R. (2006). Digital Generations: Children, Young People, and New Media. Retrieved from http://link.library.curtin.edu.au/p?pid=CUR_ALMA2186270010001951

Burke, A. (2013). Children’s Construction of Identity in Virtual Play Worlds: A Classroom Perspective. Language and Literacy; Toronto. Volume 15 (issue 1). 58-73.

https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1428558472?accountid+10382

Cowling, David. (2018). Social Media Statistics Australia – January 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.socialmedianews.com.au/social-media-statistics-australia-january-2018/

Donath, J. (1996). Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. Communities in Cyberspace. Kollock, P. and Smith M. (eds). London: Routledge. Retrieved from: smg.media.mit.edu/People/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html

Johnson, G. (2006). Internet Use and Cognitive Development: A Theoretical Framework. E- Learning and Digital Media, volume 3 (Issue 4). 565-573. https://doi.org/10.304/elea.2006.3.4.565

Papacharissi, Z. (2011). A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Networked Sites.

Ren, Y. , Kraut, R. , Kielser, S. (2007). Applying Common Identity and Bond Theory to Design of Online Communities. Organization Studies. Vol 28 (issue 3). 377-408.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607076007

Slater, D. (2002). Social relationships and identity online and offline. Retrieved from https://dourish.com/classes/readings/Slater-SocialRelationshipsIdentity.pdf

“Influencers of Instagram:” Shaping style and lifestyle trends for an online community

Instagram has become a dominant platform of social media for individuals to visually fashion a desired aesthetic as a construction of identity. Instagram is a visually performing platform where individuals who utilise the platform can develop a face for a community. I propose to define community within this study to refer to the Instagram accounts a user followers and those Instagram accounts following their Instagram page and retrieving their content. This proposal aligns with the attributes of social media and the participation invoked by network structures, along with theoretical conceptions of community within virtual contexts. The internet fosters participation by users across all platforms by breaking down and eliminating traditional communication barriers such as time and space. Definitions of online communities all revolve around the indistinguishable point that the internet has revolutionised the way people communicate with others and how we maintain and develop relationships with people online. Pearson (2009) exclaims that online, users can claim whoever they wish to be, while Wellman and Guila (1997) examine virtual communities to assert the notion that social network analysts have needed to educate traditional, place-oriented, community sociologists that community can stretch well beyond the neighbourhood. Within Katz (2004) review of theoretical concepts of communities and considerations of how new communication technologies affect traditional notions of community, the author segregates an idea of the social network community. The social network “is sustained by personal communication technologies and cyberspace and deviates widely in its social implications from the traditional community” (Katz, 2004, p. 331). To explore definitions of community within an online, social context among the platform of Instagram can illuminate how individual’s construct a particular identity that generates a specific community whereby people visually communicate.

Adopting these definitions of community realises the fact that traditional community ties have shifted from geographically focused to beginning to think about individual’s personal communities and individual social networks. Emanating from Katz’ definition of a social network as reviewed above, this paper shall attempt to examine some of the social implications that have developed from people specifically forming deliberate communities to connect with on Instagram. Communities within the application of Instagram are formed through the following and receiving of a following by other users ensuing a visually oriented community, which fosters content creation to revolve around aesthetic themes. It is a deliberate and honestly enlightening action into how an everyday person shapes their identity in the way that purposely following accounts on Instagram is a self-conscious decision that tailors a defined community based around a certain type and ‘style’ of content an Instagram user would like to see each day. Adami and Jewiit (2016) examine visual social media tracing themes that become pertinent to visual communication and social media: emerging genres and practices; identity construction; everyday public/private vernacular practices; and transmedia circulation, appropriation and control. I will draw on some these themes to theorize Instagram as a visual platform, specifically identity construction to begin a discussion on how centralized persons with a major Instagram following can foster sub-culture specific communities that can be identified through individuals personal Instagram’s ‘aesthetic’ to develop an identity online.

Instagram is a mobile oriented application which ultimately means it is a network that can be accessed, updated and kept up to date within any space and at any point in time as communication has become instantaneous. In Australia, 81% of young adults aged 18-29 have an Instagram account with usage continuing to grow, rising from an average 23 to nearly 38 times per week with an average of nearly 27 minutes spent using the platform (Sensis 2017). Young adults and teenagers are the key demographics associated with this study as this age group permeates care in self-presentation and identity management on Instagram while treating it as a fundamental daily activity. Drawing on Mascheroni, Vincent, and Jimenez (2015) study of teenage girl’s construction of identity online, the authors state mobile communication as serving an important role in the process of self-presentation providing full time access to peer culture. Peer to peer culture on Instagram is a key aspect of deliberating what drives these users to share, post and consume on Instagram as a full time, ongoing project of self-identity that is accessed and updated multiple times a day, interrupting daily life to examine and potentially maintain a specific image to ones following. Understanding the patterns of identity construction within Instagram’s platform structures and as a process embedded in peer cultures across all mediums of social media is to understand that identity plays a key role in virtual communities (Donath, 1999). It is important to examine how individuals tailor an image of themselves within the presence of others online. Goffman’s (1959) theory of self- presentation provides much of the foundations for some late identity studies within the context of virtual communities. Goffman’s (1959) study (as cited by Mascheroni, Vincent, and Jimenez, 2015) demonstrates that in the presence of others, individuals engage in a constant, particular self-presentation aimed at controlling how co-present actors will denote impressions of themselves. “Self-presentation is about social rituals of “impression management” and involves learning how to deal with other’ responses and maintain expressive control by putting on a “face” (Mascheroni, Vincent, and Jimenez, 2015). This theory provides solid foundations to further identity management within contemporary communication among virtual communities as it has become a 24 hour, 7 days a week task to monitor social identity as the pace of the virtual world is rapid and constant.

As stated previously, using Adami and Jewiit’s (2016) themes to explore visual communication from Instagram users to construct a “face” for their networked communities within this platform. “The emergence of new genres and practices among social media platforms make available the creation and sharing of multimodel artefacts to an unprecedented number of people” (Adami and Jewitt, 2016). Among Instagram this quote becomes relevant through visual commentary by users: Calkin (2015, p.2) explores Instagram as a primary space for self-actualisation with Instagram providing us with a structured platform to reconstruct our histories and lived experiences through a photographic profile and with commentary. With deliberate and thoughtful processes while synonymously examining content co-present Instagram users share on their profiles, users post pictures with rhetorical captions if desired to align with the specific sub-culture of their community within Instagram. This behaviour is accurately contextualised in Adami and Jewitt’s (2016) second theme of visual communication that regards identity construction, suggesting: “As we express identities through the clothes we wear or the furniture of our rooms, so too we express our identities through visuals shared online.” Visually identifiable sub-cultures are difficult to specify and contextualise within this theorized discussion as there is no defined list of sub-cultures that are visually distinguishable across teenagers and young adults, however it is extensive. Sub-cultured communities that can be tailored visually through photographs online usually characterise themes that present visual cohesion and are ‘aesthetically-pleasing’ such as fashion and culture; art and design. However, this is a very limiting justification as it does not internalize individual’s identities and communities to the specific aesthetic they are striving for while utilizing Instagram. The notion of fluidity is important when thinking about the aesthetics of Instagram and accepting the lack of definition we are able to ascribe sub-cultures of communities within Instagram to. Fluidity reflects the nature of the internet as it is so ambiguous, as are individuals when using social media. It is illuminating to note that one day someone will follow an array of, for example, architecture Instagram pages: these accounts sharing multimodal content of interiors and houses, all agreeably aesthetically pleasing, with all accounts reflecting a specific theme of visual content that this individual wishes to consume each day, to unfollowing all of them the next day and following a range of supermodel’s public Instagram accounts instead. To complicate the discussion further the opposite could just as easily occur, with said user following these supermodels within the same space and time as they followed the series of architecture pages, suggesting they are interested in both visual communities within Instagram. As inadequate and vague this example is it completely viable within an online context. The internet is ambiguous and allows individuals to be fluid and fluctuate between content that they consume and create with the ability to deconstruct and reconstruct these identities.

Characterising behaviour on Instagram to contextualise self-presentation exposes the fact that private individuals communicate daily through the public publishing of visuals (Adami and Jewitt, 2016). The everyday practices of self-actualisation have shifted to be monitored across both online and offline modes of communication. This shift is everyday vernacular practices is a primary theme in visual communication, with individuals having to accommodate for their literal physical appearance as well as their identity and physical ‘aesthetic’ within their social networks. Our identities are politically chosen (Weeks, 1985, as cited by Calkin, 2015, p.2). What political objective does this ever constant monitoring of how people perceive our Instagram’s fulfil? Denoting simple actions, such as how many ‘likes’ an individual has on their photo from their community, determines the following and therefore the influence a user has to a certain number of other Instagram users. This initiates discussion about Instagram communities and the influencers of style to people’s perceived identities within this platform because Instagram is image laden media. The individuals with a major following on Instagram, exorbitantly more than the average user, have been colloquially termed within the Instagram community as ‘influencers,’ however the term has become recognised as of late to the private sector. Influencers shape lifestyle trends and act as an idealised ‘person-centred environments’ for specific Instagram communities.

In harmonizing studies that exclaim the roads mapped via the internet exponentials the relaxation of communal constraints, studying identity construction on Instagram explores new effects of the tailored self online. These influencers are popular to a specific community as they provide image laden content across their Instagram profile that ultimately shapes a certain type of lifestyle and aesthetic. The term influencer comes from the aesthetic shaped over time on their profile that people idealise and review as aesthetic. The content tends to reflect a specific sub-culture that can be visually prescribed. Donath’s (1999) early theories of identity within virtual communities stating “care of one’s own identity, one’s reputation, is fundamental to the formation of community” can be theorized within the modern context of Instagram. She recognises that individuals become attuned to the nuances of signature styles, which is exemplary within the platform of Instagram as people follow those people and accounts where their personal style resonates with their own. This theory of identity creates a two-way spectrum that proves summative to an extent of the way sub-culture communities on Instagram tailor and influence individual’s self-presentation and shape their online identity. The interesting fact about ‘influencers’ is they gain their following naturally due to the ‘success’ of the aesthetic of their Instagram account. They have fostered a community around a specific nuanced signature style of visual content that a large cohort of people has followed and taken to be beneficial content in the shaping of their own identity on Instagram. Donath’s (1999) theories were written a decade before Instagram was founded and nearly two decades before the idea of ‘influencers’ was even termed as it is a recent trend that has been denoted to some personalities online. Donath’s, as well as an extensive number of scholarly theories regarding identity construction within virtual communities has proved efficient and exemplary to the medium of social networked communities on Instagram.

This study serves as a brief touch on the surface of a trend within Instagram that is extremely deep and equally diverse. Focusing on Adami and Jewitt’s (2016) visual communication themes among identity theory served as viable foundations to extend Goffman (1959) theory of self-presentation to actualise into the context of how Instagram’s network structure encourages users to visually present one’s own identity and reputation to appeal to their constructed community. The structure of this study neglected discussions of communication within the platform and among users and followers, however, for the purpose of diverting the study to define ‘influencers’ as fostering communities through the visual and construction of a ‘face,’ it could be disregarded. Using Instagram and as the platform to examine virtual identities and inserting the vague notion of what is “aesthetically pleasing” within virtual communities is a relatively new chapter of studying social networks as it focuses on what a visual community could mean in the vast sphere of virtual communities but is a relevant topic to further as they have not been deemed influencers for no reason.

Reference List

Calkin, M. (2015). Making Pretty: Examing Contemporary Identity Construction through Instagram. (Thesis dissertation). Retrieved from http://sfsu-dspace.calstate.edu/handle/10211.3/162807

Donath, J. (1999). Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. In P. Kollock, & M. A. Smith (Eds.), Communities in Cyberspace (pp. 29-59). New York: Routledge.
http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html

Hodkinson, P. (2015). Bedrooms and beyond: Youth, identity and privacy on social network sites. New Media and Society. DOI: 10.1177/1461444815454

Katz, J. E., Rice, R. E., Acord, S., Dasgupta, K., & David, K. (2004). Personal Mediated Communication and the Concept of Community in Theory and Practice. In P. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication and Community: Communication Yearbook 28 (pp. 315-371). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. http://www.comm.ucsb.edu/faculty/rrice/A80KatzRiceAcordDasguptaDavid2004.pdf

Pearson, E. (2009). All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks. First Monday. 14(3). http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2162/2127

Sensis (2017). Sensis Social Media Report 2017: Chapter 1 – Australians and social media. [Fact Sheet]. Retrieved from https://www.sensis.com.au/asset/PDFdirectory/Sensis-Social-Media-Report-2017.pdf

Turkle, S. (1997). Constructions and Reconstructions of Self in Virtual Reality. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet. Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
http://www.mit.edu/~sturkle/pdfsforstwebpage/ST_Construc%20and%20reconstruc%20of%20self.pdf

Turkle, S. (1997). Multiple Subjectivity and Virtual Community at the End of the Freudian Century. Sociological Inquiry, 67(1).
http://www.mit.edu/~sturkle/pdfsforstwebpage/ST_Multiple%20Subjectivity.pdf

Van Der Nagel, E. and Frith, J. (2015). Anonymity, pseudonymity, and the agency of online identity: Examining the social practices of r/Gonewild. First Monday, 20(3), Retrieved from http://www.ojphi.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/5615/4346

SOCIAL MEDIA AND POLITICAL PROTEST: SOCIAL MOVEMENTS DUE TO WEB 2.0

Abstract

A cultural transformation of society over the years besides a modern convergence of media platforms has increased the network in many communities, mainly in the political environment. According to the principles of convergence culture of Jenkins (2006), which means a new way of collaboration between users and media, this paper examines how the use of these media platforms, mainly social media, can be effective in political causes, which views are supported by political movements such as Arab Spring happened in the Middle East and North Africa, Movement 15-M in Spain and Occupy Wall Street in New York, pointed by Gerbaudo (2012) and Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015). These protests demonstrated that Web 2.0 allows transformation of individual thoughts into collective ideas, passive participation in active collaboration of users.

Introduction

Over the last years, the society has been passing for a cultural transformation besides an evolution of technology and a changed of communication through multiple platforms of media, which is understood as culture convergence (Jenkins, 2006). The interaction between users and media, traditional and digital, but mainly social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube due to Web 2.0, besides the development of smartphones, tablets, and notebooks, has resulted in a new way of participation, production e and consumption of information, which means active collaboration and rise of networking in many niches, as political communities. Through political movements such as Arab Spring occurred in the Middle East and North Africa, Movement 15-M in Spain and Occupy Wall Street in New York, pointed by Gerbaudo (2012) and Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015), the influence of digital media not only in support but control of the protests. The movements shared civil resistance techniques in sustained campaigns online involving strikes, demonstrations, rallies, as well as the use of social media to organise, communicate and raise awareness among the population and the international community in the face of attempts to repression and censorship. In other words, the use of digital media for political purpose in communities allows transcends the online environment and starts to occupy squares and streets, as well as has the ability to provide voice and power to any citizen from any part of the world in order to report the misconduct of politics. Having said that, this paper will argue about the effective contribution of Web 2.0 and respective platforms in engagement in politics communities due to allowing an active participation collective of each user, alternative production of media and simultaneous distribution of information.

Literature Review

The migration for a new model of communication as result of the cultural transformation of society, the evolution of technology, and the use of multiple media platforms is called culture convergence (Jenkins, 2006). The social interaction of each individual, their integration with media, traditional and digital, besides the development of electronic devices has resulted in a new mode of consumption, production, and distribution of information. According to Jenkins (2006), this convergence can be understood through main concepts as media convergence, participatory culture, and collective intelligence. The first principle regards to not only the integration of media, traditional and digital on electronic devices but also producers and audience. The participatory culture can be comprehended by Jenkins (2006) as the change of participation passive to active of the audience, which results in a change of mode of production of media, now the consumers are able to interact and create with the media corporations, a process which can be linked to the third principle. The collective intelligence is the transformation of the individual to the collective, so that each thought, view, an idea of each user is shared to increase a general one, and as an alternative source of media, it is viable networking between niches and communities according to each subject. Furthermore, according to Jenkins (2006), for being an independent collaboration of media corporations, can configure a decentralization of power of them. In summary, despite had been written more than a decade ago, the author identifies e directs the principles of production, consumption and distribution of media, which can be seen nowadays.

Principles of contemporary communication illustrated by Gerbaudo (2012) in the political environment, over recent samples of popular manifestations not only supported but controlled by social media. Through movements such as Arab Spring happened in Middle East and North Africa, Movement 15-M in Spain and Occupy Wall Street in New York, Gerbaudo (2012), analyzed mainly the use of digital media by political activists as a tool of organisation and popular mobilization for mass action on streets. According to Gerbaudo (2012), the Internet and respective platforms of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and photographic sites such as Flickr, have been crucial for the creation of groups to establishing alliances and forming identities. It is through these online media tool and the interaction with electronic devices such as smartphones that not only the dissemination of ideas are made but also choreograph the logistics and operational part during the protests, in real time, such as schedules, dates and other details of the organisation of the political actions, as well as the distribution of content such as instant photos, videos and news about the actions, the so-called ‘citizen journalism’. ‘Facebook revolutions’, and ‘Twitter revolutions’ regards to the power of these media in transform the scenery political from the standpoint of society. “We are all Khaled Said” coordinated protests as a result of the shared photos on these platforms of Khaled Mohamed Saeed died after being beaten to death by police is a sample pointed by Gerbaudo (2012). Likewise, the “Indignados Movement” in Spain which each individual frustration regards to political representativeness on social media became a collective one which resulted in protests on streets organised and supported mainly through Twitter and live-streaming video platforms. In addition, Occupy Wall Street happened in New York, is another movement showed by Gerbaudo (2012), which with the slogan “We are the 99%” referring to the inequality of the income distribution of wealth in the United States between the richest 1% and the rest of the population, the Zuccotti Park was occupied. However, in contrast to the other protests illustrated above, in this case, the participation of sympathizers was motived more for emotional standpoint than the social media through a sense of solidarity spread on the community of Twitter for activists. To sum up, the author is optimistic about the use of these platforms of media against the oppression of the population, mainly for promoting minority voice, but highlighted the importance of constant reformulations in order to sustain a degree of continuity of respective approaches online and on streets.

As the same way of Gerbaudo (2012), Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015), analyze the crucial importance of digital platforms on organisation and mobilization of Arab Spring movements, country to another. However, is also considered by the authors the importance of the interaction of traditional media such as a cable television in order to maintain the effective results of the protests, which reinforces the principle media convergence argued by Jenkins (2006). For Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015), the interaction of media has motivated and increased the participation of citizens in various locations, countries, including remote ones, to participate in the movements, which means that there is no substitution process, but complementarity of media between forms of protest resulting in urban space. According to Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015), protests liked at the death of Mohamed Bouazizi is a sample of motivation due to multiple platforms of media. Mohamed was a Tunisian street vendor whose self-immolation was the trigger for the protests in Tunisia that led then-President Ben Ali to resign, which images of protests shared on Facebook and Twitter through hashtags such as Twitter hashtag #bouazizi #sidibouzid #tunisia, was used as well for channels Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya and France 24 which were spread and motivated protests. In addition, Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015), argue with Gerbaudo (2012) according to the necessity of sustaining a degree of continuity mainly in participation in the public space. For the authors, the revolutions can even start on social networks, but it is on the urban space with them unfold. In summary, despite to emphasize the importance of the integration of traditional media with new media and an active participation on streets, the social media still the major tool of expressions and dissemination of claim-making of contemporary society.

Discussion

According to the samples argued above, seems that it is noticed the effective contribution of digital platforms in engagement in political communities and networking due to allowing an active participation collective, alternative production and simultaneous distribution of information of media.

Firstly, regards to participatory culture of Jenkins (2006), it is showed through Gerbaudo (2012) and Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015), the importance of the social media in order to provide the active participation of activists and sympathizers in political communities around the world, which organisations and mobilizations begins on environment online and have been resulted in collective movements, the resignation of leaders, reformulation of laws until reappropriation the urban space.

Secondly, the alternative production of media as result of the collective intelligence Jenkins (2006), shows how each individual collaboration through each photo, video or text uploaded on digital media of each common citizen can contribute to building many perspectives of only one approach, a device to device, country to country. Similarly, this alternative production of media reinforces the importance of the integration of public and corporations of media, as seen between cable tv channels such as Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya and France 24 and social media as on case of death of Mohamed Bouazizi, which content shared on digital media by activists was used for these Tv channels, and resulted in the dissemination effective of political networks, according to Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015). Furthermore, this alternative production of content can mean also a decentralization of power until then restricted to the mainstream media, which results for political communities more transparency of the content shared due to the fact of being distributed of ordinary citizens of many different standpoints. Having said that, the alternative media produced by the citizens can reformulate regimes that, in this way, can question the legitimacy by rulers, which highlights the importance of alternative production for political groups online (Alsayyad and Guvenc, 2015).

Lately, the simultaneous distribution of information through digital media through respective devices allows improvement on political communities once the content can be shared and seen of many places, country to country, which can increase the effectivity of organisations of online groups and the movements on streets. The simultaneous distribution of media is a result convergence of media argued by Jenkins (2006) and can be illustrated through political protests as Arab Spring, “Indignados” and Occupy Wall Street pointed by Gerbaudo (2012) and Alsayyad and Guvenc (2015). Having said that, this contemporary distribution provides the choreography of the logistics and operational part before, during and after the protests, real-time meetings for groups online and on streets, as well as an instantaneous distribution of content.

Conclusions and Future Study

In summary, social networks due to Web 2.0 strengthen the political movements, which means that the social media provide to activists and citizens disclose political causes, to disseminate movements, to organise protests, to join sympathizers and to cross national and international borders, articulating with other groups of political movements online and on public space. Likewise, through alternative channels provided by the Internet, social movements are now able to articulate and guide, within broad virtual spaces, issues, and discussions that will not be presented only in traditional media. Therefore, it is extremely important to the existence of interactive communication provided by Web 2.0 that lead to new concepts of reflection on political reality. Furthermore, the internet and its platforms have become tools of social transformation and to reveal the collectivity of the discontent of each citizen. However, beyond recognize the necessity of interaction of digital media with the traditional media to maintain the effectivity of the dissemination of political groups, and also highlight the importance of constant reformulations in order to sustain a degree of continuity of respective approaches of political groups, it is noticed the importance of the Internet as the major tool of networking on political communities, which has been given power to society in order to end authoritarian regimes and corrupt elites as well the revolutionize the political environment.

References

Alsayyad, N & Guvenc, M. (2015). Virtual Uprisings: On the Interaction of New Social Media, Traditional Media Coverage and Urban Space during the Arab Spring.

Urban Studies, Vol.52(11), 2018-2034. Retrieved from:

http://journals.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1177/0042098013505881

Gerbaudo, P. (2012). Tweets and the Streets: Social Media and Contemporary Activism.

Retrieved from:

http://link.library.curtin.edu.au/p?pid=CUR_ALMA51153142430001951

Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The Impact of Web 2.0 on Online Dating Communities

Abstract

This paper explores the changes in online technologies that have helped facilitate growing online communities and their subsequent effects on online dating. The advancements of Web 2.0 technologies have allowed Web users to easily and more efficiently participate and collaborate in online communities. Platforms such as social networking sites encourage users to share content and form connections with other users of similar interests (Cormode & Krishnamurthy, 2008). This has helped propel online dating as virtual communities provide a better suited romantic network for people of either isolated communities or of small romantic possibilities, such as those looking for specific qualities. Even though dating, whether online or offline, is one-to-one, the affordances of Web 2.0 and communities allow Web users to meet and communicate with a far greater romantic network than they would be by offline dating practices alone. This can be seen by the abundance of online dating sites that encourage the formation of weak ties within online communities to create a bigger dating pool, so that Web users can better find a romantic match. This includes growing niche dating sites such as JDate and Christian Mingle, operated by Spark Networks, which aim to bring together people of the same faith who are seeking long-term relationships. It encourages the formation of weak ties online as users are willing and wanting to meet people outside of their offline romantic network.

Keywords: Web 2.0, communities, online dating, network, weak ties

Impact of Web 2.0 & Communities on Online Dating

The impact of Web 2.0 on the growth of online dating communities is the opportunity to forego face-to-face communication and spacial proximity when it comes to looking for a romantic partner. Web users from all over the world and of different ethnicities, religions, and sexual orientations can meet a new network of romantic possibilities as a result of changing Web 2.0 technologies. Specifically, it has changed the way people can find information and communicate with other people of interest online. Prior to the facilitation of online dating, people would generally look within their community to find a partner but are now empowered as a result of the Internet to look beyond spacial proximity and face-to-face communication to do so. Instead, users can find suitable interest communities provided by leading online dating networks such as Spark Networks. Spark Networks provides users with niche dating sites to help create weak ties among other users as they encourage similar people to come together on the same site; such as popular JDate and Christian Mingle bringing together users of the same religion. Weak ties refer to the bridges made between strangers or friends-of-friends, and is the first stage of cultivating any friendship, and help online dating site’s such as JDate to excel by providing a common community for people to meet.

Affordances of Web 2.0 on Community

Web 2.0 can be characterised by technological advancements that facilitate a more “socially connected Web” where everyone is able to add to and edit the information space (Cormode & Krishnamurthy, 2008); a result of standards produced from people working on Web 1.0 (Berners-Lee cited by Anderson, 2007). Users of the Web have moved from mostly content consumers to now content creators; where niche groups can exchange content of any kind to people from anywhere (Cormode & Krishnamurthy, 2008). Certain features that have come to be associated with ‘Web 2.0’ include participation, user as contributor, and richer user experiences, and should be seen as a consequence of a more fully implemented Web (Anderson, 2007). Sir Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the World Wide Web, believes Web 2.0 is what the Web was supposed to be all along; an interactive and collaborative global information workspace all about connecting people (cited by Anderson, 2007). The ability that Web users can create and share content to anyone is a result of a series of technologies such as blogs, wikis, and social networking sites, that enable greater user participation and collaboration. Cormode and Krishnamurthy believe the important site features of a Web 2.0 platform include first class entities and prominent profile pages; ability to form connections between users; ability to post content in many forms, such as photos, videos, and comments; and other more technical features, such as third-party enhancements, rich content types, and communication with other users (2008). These features allow Web users to greater organise content and communication online, and thus encourage users to interact with the Web as a result of the ease of access and use of online platforms. More importantly, the ability to control Web 2.0 technologies has encouraged the formation of online communities; where users of the same interest and of same social networks can participate and collaborate together, opening the door for endless possibilities of online communication.

Online communities, as defined by Tedjamulia et al., are a social network of users who share similar interests and practices and who communicate regularly over a common communication medium (as cited by Liu et al., 2014). The abilities for online communities are therefore endless as they allow anyone with access to a common communication medium to interact, and have been found useful for knowledge sharing, building relationships, sharing experiences, buying and selling, having fun, and creating new personalities, environments, or stories (Armstrong and Iii, as cited by Liu et al., 2014). The rise in social networking sites, however, has propelled online communities as a result of their collaborative nature. As defined by Boyd & Ellison, a social network site should allow individuals to: (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system (as cited by Porter, 2015). Thus the structure of social networking sites means mutual information sharing is central in creating online communities, as it provides connection, communication, and privacy management capabilities (Porter, 2015). Just by participating in the structure of social networking sites, Web users are automatically creating and engaging in an online community fuelled by users with similar interests. This can be seen with the rise of online communities, ranging from social, professional, interest, and dating communities.

Online dating communities, in particular, are a growing industry aimed at providing a communication channel for Web users all over the world, tailored specifically to users who are looking for a romantic partner, connection, or encounter (Quesnel, 2010). As a result of growing Web 2.0 technologies, social networking sites such as JDate and Christian Mingle have allowed Web users to better find a dating community suited to different dating needs. In particular, it has seen the rise in ‘interest communities’ where spacial proximity is not a necessary condition as it instead involves people with common interests communicating with each other (Averweg & Leaning, 2012). For example, Jewish people looking for a Jewish partner in a small community will benefit from using Jdate as it provides a central online community of varying Jewish singles looking for long-term relationships. Even though dating in these examples is one-to-one, community is an important element of online dating as it encourages similar people to come together in hopes of finding a romantic partner.

Impact of Web 2.0 & Communities on Online Dating

Ortega & Hergovich explain that dating in the past hundred years has been a result of ‘weak ties’ which serve as bridges between close friends and other clustered groups, allowing people to connect to the global community in several ways (2017). This phenomenon means that people were more likely to marry a friend-of-a-friend or someone they coincided with in the past, such as through work or educational institutions (Ortega & Hergovich, 2017). The way Web 2.0 and online communities have revolutionised dating is by connecting users “to meet and form relationships with perfect strangers, that is, people with whom they had no previous social tie” (Rosenfeld & Thomas, as cited in Ortega & Hergovich, 2017). The affordances of the Internet have brought people together from all over the world and of varying differences to better find a suited romantic network. Subsequently, people are no longer bound to geographical locations and community barriers as online dating serves as a bridge between strangers and users to meet people outside of said barriers. Online dating creates a larger dating pool for Web users as it brings people from outside their known social circle, creating connections with ‘strangers’ of similar interests in hopes of forming solid relationships. It also allows users to make weak ties with even more people and bridge over to even more communities as online dating creates a virtual community space, allowing users with a desire to connect to strengthen ties with other users (Ortega & Hergovich, 2017).

Why Interest Communities are Important for Online Dating

Above all, the importance of online communities is its ability for Web users to establish ties with people whom they would have of otherwise had no connection to. For online dating, its main attraction is to expand the romantic network for people seeking a romantic partner. Interest communities can help speed up the process by creating a central (virtual) location for people of similar orientations, ethnicities, and other qualities to easily meet online. Spark Networks does this by providing users with a portfolio of premium niche dating sites that all aim for singles seeking serious relationships (“Global Leader in Online Dating”, 2018). CEO of Spark Networks Adam Berger explains ‘niche dating’ as a tight-knit community, where “people instantly feel comfortable and know they’re among people who are just like themselves in many different ways” (as cited in Alfonsi & Thompson, 2010). By creating a narrower and shallower dating pool, niche dating sites connect people “by their beliefs, their backgrounds, and their passions” (Berger, as cited in Alfonsi & Thompson, 2010). By following Boyd & Ellison’s structure of a social network site, Web users would create a public or semi-public profile within niche dating sites in order to articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection (as cited by Porter, 2015). By creating a profile and answering a questionnaire Web users can easily identify with whom they already share similar qualities, such as Berger’s examples of beliefs, backgrounds, and passions. For example, users of Spark Network’s can create a public or semi-public profile, articulate a list of users with similar beliefs and passions, and view and create connections with suitable users. This new dating pool will be specifically tailored to each user and will subsequently increase their romantic network possibilities as it allows them to meet suitable people outside of their offline community.

Online Dating Today

CEO of Spark Networks Adam Berger believes by catering different dating sites to specific qualities of different individuals, people are more likely to feel comfortable with online dating as they are already in a community that they would want to associate themselves with. This can be seen by the success of Spark Network’s most popular niche dating site ‘JDate’ which is the “leading online community for Jewish singles and [is] responsible for more Jewish marriages than all other online dating sites combined” (“Global Leader in Online Dating”, 2018). This proves the argument that even though dating is one-on-one, online communities are a necessity and extremely influential in the online dating realm. Compared to finding a partner solely in face-to-face communities, people now have the luxury to find a better suited romantic network of people as a result of varying niche dating sites. For example, people in a small Jewish community can expand their network by using JDate to find more Jewish partners in other surrounding communities. This helps to cancel out all people the Web user is not interested in, much like in real life, as the aim of niche dating sites is to bring together similar people. Spark Network’s has other popular sites such as Christian Mingle, aimed for people who practice Christianity; Elite Singles, for educated and successful singles; and eDarling, for European users seeking long-term relationships, under their repertoire. By providing a bundle of different niche dating sites, Spark Networks increases the potential to meet the perfect partner by decreasing and specifying various dating pools. Instead of users jumping into a dating site of millions of people, they have the opportunity to find a better suited romantic network based on their own interests and qualities in a much more personal pool.

Conclusion

To conclude, the affordances of Web 2.0 allows Web users to greater organise content and communication online and encourages users to interact with the Web and with each other. Greater interaction is the result of growing interest communities and communication platforms where groups of similar people can come together online for a myriad of reasons, such as for educational, professional, and social purposes. The success of online dating in particular is the result of the increase in social networking sites, such as Spark Networks, which encourage similar people to communicate and create meaningful connections online. Interest communities and niche dating sites have helped propel online dating as they provide users with a more suitable and personal online dating pool, bringing together people of similar qualities and interests by creating public or semi-public profiles. Without the ease of Web 2.0’s platforms, people would look within their offline community and within their weak ties to find a romantic network but are now empowered as a result of online dating sites. Instead of looking just within a geographical community, users can find various online dating communities based on beliefs, backgrounds, and passions, and are able to meet people with whom they otherwise have no connection to — only increasing their romantic network.

Maletic_18822072_ConferencePaper

References

Alfonsi, S., & Thompson, V. (2010, June 18). As Dating Pool Shrinks, Love Matches Grow. abcNews. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Broadcast/spark-networks-niche-dating-web-site/story?id=10909280

Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. JISC Technology and Standards Watch. Retrieved from http://21stcenturywalton.pbworks.com/f/What%20is%20Web%202.0.pdf

Averweg, U. R., & Leaning, M. (2012). Social media and the re-evaluation of the terms ’community, ’virtual community’ and ’virtual identity’ as concepts of analysis. i-Manager’s Journal on Information Technology, 1(4), 12. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1671518035?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo

Cormode, G., & Krishnamurthy, B. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 & Web 2.0. First Monday 13(6). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2125/1972

Liu, L., Wagner, C., & Chen, H. (2014). Determinants of Commitment in an Online Community: Assessing the Antecedents of Weak Ties and Their Impact. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 24(4), (pp. 271-296). Retrieved from https://www-tandfonline-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1080/10919392.2014.956609

Ortega, J., & Hergovich, P. (2017). The Strength of Absent Ties: Social Integration via Online Dating. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.10478

Spark Networks SE. (2018). Global Leader in Online Dating. Retrieved from https://www.spark.net/about-us/company-overview/

Porter, C. E. (2015). Virtual communities and social networks. In L. Cantoni & J. A. Kanowski (Eds) Communication and Technology (pp. 161-181). Retrieved from https://books.google.com.au/books?id=AhxpCgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Quesnel, A. (2010). Online Dating Study: User Experiences of an Online Dating Community. Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse LLC, 2(11), 3. Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/323/online-dating-study-user-experiences-of-an-online-dating-community

The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Building Powerful Communities

The Rise of the Sharing Economy:

Building Powerful Communities

Ananya Alagh

Curtin University

Abstract

In this paper, I intend to examine the way in which Web 2.0 has had a significant impact on our sense and understanding of community, and has allowed for the generation of meaningful interpersonal relationships across physical and geographical barriers. I look at the way that Web 2.0 ideologies have changed our idea of community through the specific lens of digital economic communities, referred to as the sharing economy. With reference to real life examples, and detailed studies like Guttentag (2013) and Luckman (2013) on specific peer-to-peer markets, I outline the unique way in which digital economic communities act as a forum for the formation for strong networks of relationships between participants to create powerful digital communities. I argue that there are intrinsic social conventions that guide behaviour, and specific motivations for participation within these kinds of communities, that has allowed the sharing economy to expand so rapidly, and thrive over the past few years.

A PDF for this paper is available here.

——————————————————

It is almost an understatement to say that advancements in digital technology have had a drastic impact on day to day life around the world. In fact, the expansion of Web 2.0 based applications has radically changed the way in which we carry out almost all of our activities and interactions with one another.

Since it is the concept that underpins this analysis, it is important to define exactly what is meant by the term Web 2.0. Rather than just a set of technologies, for the purpose of this argument, Web 2.0 can be thought of as a philosophy as well; which is able be practiced as a result of the growth of this digital technology (Hoegg, Martignoni, Meckel, & Stanoevska-Slabeva, 2006). The basic ideology of Web 2.0 focuses on collaboration and creation between users of the medium, creating the potential for users to build strong interpersonal relationships and grow sizable digital communities. It is an environment within which users can engage with one another about to the content and services provided to them, which generates an interface for multi-way interaction, rather than one-way information dissemination from content creator to consumer (Fuchs, 2010). It has changed our understandings of community from a concept that is defined by physically confines, to instead perceive it as a network of meaningful social connections that aren’t necessarily bound by a physical or geographical space (Ridings, Gefen & Arinze, 2002). Web 2.0 has connected members of the public across the globe to form powerful networked communities.

These changes have had significant implications for interactions between corporations and their global consumer base. Users can now engage in digital participation in a way that supports the voices and actions of other community members, creating an overwhelming presence, that corporations must take into account in order to be operate in this new, digitized world that seems to be controlled by digital publics.

Given the prominent role users have within this digital environment, it could be argued that Web 2.0 has essentially altered the basis of the the way in which traditional economic communities function. It has created a huge change in terms of the dynamics between corporation and consumer. As a consequence of the intense focus on user interaction and collaboration, as well as the new complexity of online spaces, Web 2.0 has given rise to a digital marketplace within which consumers have the capability to participate as customers or merchants, as desired. The emergence of this “sharing economy” within which consumers can provide services traditionally provided by companies or corporations, has served as a basis for web users to create strong, thriving digital economic communities (Zervas, Proserpio, & Byers, 2017).

Within this paper, I intend to analyse the effects of Web 2.0 in terms of re-shaping and strengthening ties between internet users across the globe, with reference to a few specific examples. I argue, that the sharing economy that has emerged as a result of Web 2.0 has empowered consumers by strengthening communities in both a social and economic sense, giving rise to modern digital economic communities that have the power to function in place of traditional industry.

Economic Communities Online: The Sharing Economy

Much like real life, digital communities that lack direct geographic links tend to form when various individuals find shared interests, hobbies or opinions and then engage in related activities or dialogue about them within a common digital space (Ridings, Gefen & Arinze, 2002). However, there is an added level of complexity and interest in terms of the idea of digital communities when observing economic communities specifically. The factors that serve to maintain and strengthen community ties – such as mutual trust, knowledge-sharing, and balancing self-reliance with interpersonal support – become amplified with the complications that arise when concepts such as the quality of goods and services, and ongoing financial exchanges feature prominently as forms of community interaction (Hsu, Ju, Yen & Chang, 2007). It is important to break down the way in which digital economic communities function efficiently, to understand how the digitisation of these social and economic relationships have both stemmed from, and become strengthened by Web 2.0.

Digital economic communities, in their entirety, are generally referred to as the sharing economy, or peer-to-peer markets. The sharing economy consists of “software platforms acting as an intermediary between buyers and sellers” (Allen, 2015, p.24). Defining the sharing economy in this way demonstrates the way in which it is set apart from other digital communities. Although these economic communities feature participants from a wide range of demographics just like other communal spaces on the web, participants are identified within the community as either buyers, sellers, or both – which outlines some important basic conventions for interaction between two or more community members. It indicates that members in an interaction identify as either providers or consumers of a given service, rather than two exact equals. In a community within which roles are so strongly defined on the basis of ensuring the quality transmission of services and secure transmission of finances, the trust-based aspect of relationships between community members can be tested much more intensely than in other digital communities, as the implications of these interactions can have real life consequences.

Community Building in Peer-to-peer markets

Despite the added pressure on relationships within digital economic communities, the last few years serve as proof of the fact that the sharing economy actually seems to be thriving. There is a variety of examples across different types of services that demonstrate the massive expansion of peer-to-peer markets.

In the year 2014, Uber and Airbnb were valued at $18.2 billion and $10 billion respectively; both significantly higher than their counterparts within the traditional transport and hospitality industries (Cannon & Summers, 2014). The incredible success of these firms even led to the creation of other companies with similar business models. Independent craft-based businesses run via personalized websites or social media accounts, as well as sites featuring multiple vendors, like Etsy, continue to grow in popularity. Airtasker, is another example of a unique kind of peer-to-peer market place. The app that allows participants to hire other qualified participants on through the medium to complete short-term skilled labour tasks. It had immense success within Australia, generating over $5 million worth of jobs between 160,000 users between the years 2008 and 2014 (Allen, 2015).

Evidently, there seems to be incredible growth and success within the sharing economy. These user-centric communities continue to grow rapidly as a result of the the expansion and sustenance of the networks of meaningful relationships between the participants of these communities. This continuous growth and maintenance of these relationships is made possible by the very fact that the social conventions that guide bonding and relationship building in digital economic communities seem to be enhanced, rather than damaged, by the added dimension of the realities of maintaining financial security whilst purchasing goods or services from vendors on the web.

Within this section, I aim to outline some of the specific conventions for interaction based upon the technology and ideology of Web 2.0, and how they have facilitated the growth of strong digital economic communities, with reference to examples.

Trust and Knowledge Sharing

Social conventions like trust building and knowledge sharing become integrated as one within the sphere of online economic communities (Ridings, Gefen & Arinze, 2002). This in demonstrated in the system of ‘reviewing’ other participants – whether they are vendors or consumers. The review system is a direct result of the user-friendly Web 2.0 technology which creates lower barriers for participation, and even more importantly, the ideology of sharing and collaboration that guides the democratized digital space we associate with Web 2.0 (Van Dijck & Nieborg, 2009). It is somewhat unique to economic communities online.

Writing reviews – beyond just contributing to the numerical rating system – is a style of knowledge sharing that also serves as a multi-way trust building mechanism. Participants that receive positive reviews are deemed as highly trustworthy, which facilitates more future interaction between them and other participants in the community, strengthening the social ties of multiple community members. These reviews hold a special kind of significance for these economic communities, because they serve as an additional guarantee to users that they will be guaranteed appropriate services in return for their money. Ridesharing apps like Uber and Ola encourage riders to add comments and feedback along with their numerical ratings. Airbnb lets users write public reviews for both hosts and guests. In addition, participants that actually write reviews, contribute valuable information to the collective pool of knowledge available to all participants within the medium (Hsu et al. 2007). As a result, they expand their own breadth of potential social connections and build a more trustworthy image as a result of their contributions. Writing reviews to share knowledge and build networks of trust with other community members is an intrinsic part of digital economic communities, facilitated by the mechanisms of Web 2.0 that has contributed to the immense success of the sharing economy.

Behavioural Norms

Another important factor in terms of ensuring the sustained success of digital economic communities, which ties in with the idea of a review system; is adherence to socially acceptable behavioural norms (Hamari, Sjöklint, & Ukkonen, 2015). Although this phenomenon is generally observed across all communities, both online and offline, it takes a unique form within peer-to-peer markets. On a general level, understanding community norms and ensuring self-conduct in accordance with these norms, is a phenomenon that is commonly understood through the lens of by Bandura’s Self Cognitive Theory and Social Learning Theory (Hsu et al., 2007). It is the idea that individuals learn behavioural conventions by observing the way other individuals act in a given social context, and then mimic this behaviour when confronted with a similar situation. However, without the existence of real life cues and real time responses to guide behaviour, digital community members must engage in social learning and calibrate self-cognition very differently (Fuchs, 2010). This is where behavioral norms tie in closely with the review system. The reviews are an explicit demonstration of the appropriate style of communication and language within a given economic community – and the subject matter of the reviews provides clear indication as to what kinds of actions and interactions are positive, versus negative. It is an adaptation of social cognition that is appropriate for digital communities. This becomes especially pertinent to economic communities when considering the idea of outcome expectations (Hsu et al., 2007).

Outcome expectations

Outcome expectations are a key component that define the basis for trust and strong relationships within digital communities. However, within economic communities, this extends past positive social outcomes only. Measurable items like money, deadlines and service standards dictate adherence to behavioural norms on a stricter level, since inadequate delivery any of the above could lead to real life consequences that negatively impact relationships formed via the medium.

The media-rich Web 2.0 landscape is an effective way for vendors to reach out to potential consumers to demonstrate the appeal of their own product. The use of photographs is also correlated with a higher perceived trustworthiness of the vendor (Steinbruck, Schaumburg, Duda, & Kruger, 2002). Airbnb and Etsy are two examples that illustrate the use of images as the main mode of communication between vendor and consumer (Guttentag, 2013 & Luckman, 2013). As a result, failure to deliver on promised outcomes and the standard of advertised products or services is perceived by other community members as a violation of the explicit rules of the site, as well as the implicit social conventions that are appropriate within the community. Participants that do not deliver desired outcomes, and therefore deviate from the appropriate behavioural norm are subjected to deterioration of their social relationships and standing within the community, as well as damage to their business that results from the poor feedback they receive for deviating from the accepted community standard. This feedback would come in the form of ratings and reviews – the main mode of communication of digital economic communities. This is very demonstrative of how the participatory ideology of Web 2.0 and all concepts that form the foundation for strong digital economic communities are all incredibly closely intertwined. Engaging with other participants through the medium in accordance with the set social standards in order to sustain meaningful community relationships is key.

Power dynamics

The final point for discussion, in regards to the way in which digital economic communities have resulted in such strong networks between participants, is related to the power shift Web 2.0 has created from corporation to consumer (Guttentage, 2013). The Web 2.0 culture of participation generates new connections between participants, and these connections are sustained because participants recognize the power they have as part of this community of likeminded individuals. Especially within peer-to-peer markets, consumers can rely on each other, instead of continuing to support corporations or institutions that try to exercise control over their spending. This is demonstrative of the way in which Web 2.0 ideology can support autonomous thought, which gives individuals a sense of control and power. Maintaining financial flows within their own communities shifts control from traditional institutions, to community members, and allows them to browse more specialized products, instead of typical mass produced items. Guttentag (2013) explores this in the context of Airbnb, describing the way in which consumers have the potential to upset traditional industry, by choosing the lower-cost, highly unique homes offered on Airbnb, instead of generic hotel accommodation. Etsy is another great example of how niche crafts created by other community participants hold a distinct appeal over typical mass-produced goods (Luckman, 2013). These consumers are in fact creating a demand for niche, individual items that the traditional market cannot cater to (Guttentag, 2013). Community members recognize that they are receiving carefully crafted pieces that aren’t owned by too many other consumers. This also comes with an awareness that their purchase strengthens the community as a whole, and builds another connection within the network of participants, so the community can continue to thrive.

Conclusion

It’s evident that the sharing economy which has emerged as a result of Web 2.0 interfaces and ideology, has had a significant impact in terms of building strong digital communities. The continued growth and sustenance of these digital economic communities is driven by the low barriers for creation original content, and interaction between creators and consumers of participatory culture. Participants of these economic communities can feel powerful by choosing to create their own products and services, by choosing to purchase goods from other community members instead of traditional institutions and of course, by continuing to build meaningful inters personal relationships through these actions; therefore, strengthening their communities.

References

Allen, D. (2015). The Sharing Economy. Institute of Public Affairs, 67(3), 24-27. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1735010807?pq-origsite=gscholar

Cannon, S., & Summers, L. (2014) How Uber and the Sharing Economy Can Win Over Regulators. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved 25 April 2018 from https://hbr.org/2014/10/how-uber-and-the-sharing-economy-can-win-over-regulators

Fuchs, C. (2010). Social software and web 2.0: their sociological foundations and implications. In Handbook of research on web 2.0, 3.0, and X.0: technologies, business, and social applications. Volume II, ed. San Murugesan, 764-789. Hershey, PA: IGI-Global. http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Web2.pdf

Guttentag, D. (2013). Airbnb: disruptive innovation and the rise of an informal tourism accommodation sector. Current Issues In Tourism, 18(12), 1192-1217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.827159

Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2015). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Scienceand Technology, 67(9), 2047-20159. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23552

Hoegg, R., Martignoni, R., Meckel, M., & Stanoevska-Slabeva, K. (2006). Overview of business models for Web 2.0 communities. University of St.Gallen Research Platform Alexandria. Retrieved 28 March 2018, from https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/publications/31411

Hsu,M., Ju, T., Yen, C., & Chang, C. (2007). Knowledge sharing behaviour in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(2), 153-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.09.003

Liu, S., & Mattila, A. (2017). Airbnb: Online targeted advertising, sense of power, and consumer decisions. International Journal Of Hospitality Management, 60, 33-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.09.012

Luckman, S. (2013). The Aura of the Analogue in a Digital Age: Women’s Crafts, Creative Markets and Home-Based Labour After Etsy. Cultural Studies Review, 19(1), 249. http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/csr.v19i1.2585

Ridings, C., Gefen,D., & Arinze, B. (2002). Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3-4),271-295 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00021-5

Steinbruck, U., Schaumburg, H., Duda, S., & Kruger, T. (2002). A picture says more than a thousand words. CHI’02 extended Abstracts On Human Factors in Computing Systems. http://dx/doi.org/10.1145/506443.506578

Van Dijck, J., & Nieborg, D. (2009). Wikinomics and its discontents: a critical analysis of Web 2.0 business manifestos. New Media & Society, 11(5), 855-874. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444809105356

Zervas, G., Proserpio, D., & Byers, J. (2017). The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry. Journal Of Marketing Research, 54(5), 687-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0204