The Symbiotic Relationship Of Online Gaming and Community Building

Written by Callum Duffy, Curtin University

 

Abstract: This paper largely focuses on the relationship between Online Gaming and the various Communities formed because of it. Specifically analysing communities found by using ‘Overwatch’ as a prime example, the main argument presented is that various communities focused on a single, core aspect unifying them all are more or less interconnected individuals with similar general interests in regards to this core aspect, and thus have the potential for collaboration and dialogue between each other.

 

The relationship between communities and online gaming is, at its very core, a relationship that is symbiotic in nature. In relevance to this, this conference paper will focus primarily on the formation of communities in regards to online gaming, the variation of interests within formed communities and how these vary and diverge into different niche communities, the formation of friendships between members existing within the same community, and how these communities still relate to one another in regards to a singular, dynamic interest. For this conference paper, we will specifically be looking at the various communities that are brought together by the popular FPS game produced by Blizzard entertainment, ’Overwatch’.

 

A community, as defined by Gusfield (1975) focuses on two primary concepts when defining community, The first of these concepts focusing on the geographical sense of community, etc. neighbourhood, town, city. The second is relational, concerned with quality of character of human relationship, without reference to location (p. xvi). In regards to online gaming, the second definition of community provided by Gusfield is an accurate definition as to what an online gaming community is, as the relationships formed through online gaming isn’t limited by the boundaries of geographical location, as the online medium allows player to connect with each other and form relationships/communities with one another. In relation to this, Overwatch allows players from all over the world to play against one another as it isn’t limited by geographical restrictions, this allowing players to connect and as a result allowing the formations of communities, regardless of geographical location. Overwatch itself particular is a game with various communities that have been formed from it’s large, generalised community of those who play the game. I will focus on 3 different communities within the generalised player community, these being the casual, competitive and e-sport based Overwatch communities. It’s important to note that these 3 chosen communities do not accurately represent the different niche groups that exist with the generalised Overwatch player base community, rather, they represent the shift in community based priorities in relevance to Overwatch as a whole, and the interests that each group prioritises.

 

There are various communities within the game Overwatch that cater to the various players that play Overwatch. The casual Overwatch community represents the approximate majority of those who play Overwatch, and those involved within this community simply play the game for relaxation and enjoyment within their leisure time, and build friendships with the players that they meet in game, or through other communication mediums that allow members of this community to collaborate and share information. With this in mind, the primary methods of communication for those in this community are either the in-game voice chat, where individual players can speak to other players on their team, or Youtube comment sections, where they can leave comments under videos that appeal to them and their interests in relation to Overwatch. The ‘competitive’ Overwatch community focus primarily on the competitive game modes that Overwatch offers, where players get ranked based on their skill level. These players seek to improve their skills in playing a particular character, or acquire better game sense through more playtime and experience. More often than not, individuals that associate themselves with this community in particular diverge into different, niche communities that focus on the fundamental principles that the members of this community share. For example, if a player involved in the competitive community plays a particular character mores than others, he/she may also be involved in a sub-community that focuses on playing that particular character, certain exploits that players can use to better play that character, or a generalised appreciation community focusing on that character. The competitive Overwatch community uses a variety of ways to communicate, including the aforementioned methods that the casual community uses to communicate with. However, a difference in the communication side to this community in particular focuses on the application of the official Overwatch forums. These forums allow players to commentate on the state of the game overall, communicate with game developers and ask/answer questions, and communicate with like-minded players on specified topics. Finally, Overwatch’s e-sports community focuses on the ‘professional’ side of play, with professional Overwatch players receiving sponsorships, business deals in the form of contracting to an e-sports team, and being a general figurehead/role model for all Overwatch players. This community represents a minority within the Overwatch community, as the majority of Overwatch players do not associate themselves with the professional side of the game.

 

E-sports in particular, is arguably the most niche of communities that Overwatch offers. E-sports in itself is defined as “an area of sport activities in which people develop and train mental or physical abilities in the use of information and communication technologies” (Wagner, 2006). Individuals can be associated with E-sports as a competitor or more often than not, simply an observer. This is where the divergence of communities within the game Overwatch begin to reassemble into an amalgamate of individuals with similar interests. Namely, the aforementioned competitive community begins to shift towards a larger involvement in the e-sports community, be it as a spectator or an actual competitor. Overwatch itself has its very own e-sports tournament labelled ‘Overwatch League’, this league hosts various international teams, and has a central presence within the game itself. Overwatch allows player to purchase cosmetic items that represent these teams in game, in a fashion similar to that of a football jersey. With this in mind, this further strengthens the idea of merging different communities within Overwatch, as casual players have access to e-sports related cosmetics, and resources allowing them to further explore the professional Overwatch league.

 

The casual community found within Overwatch however, is the broadest of these communities that the vast majority of the player base fits into. Where casual players might play the competitive modes that Overwatch offers, they still see it as just a game, and don’t necessarily focus on the same aspects the the competitive communities of Overwatch may focus on. The formation of online friendships between individuals within this community are genuine and are capable to exist in an offline setting also. As said by Domahidi, Festl and Quandt (2014), “ Players with a pronounced motive to gain social capital and to play in a team had the highest probability to transform their social relations from online to offline context. We found that social online gamers are well integrated and use the game to spend time with old friends—and to recruit new ones”. With this in mind, the idea that communities are capable of bringing likeminded individuals together  is solidified and proven. This is regardless of how niche a community may be, as for example, a casual player may be persuaded to become a part of a competitive community via friendships made online, or a simply change in opinion towards the game as a whole.

 

With the aforementioned in mind, the various communities that are found within Overwatch are capable of interacting with each other through various different means. Specifically mentioned before were the official Overwatch forums as a large medium used by those involved within the competitive Overwatch community. Youtube however, is the biggest way for the general Overwatch community members to gather information. Be it through the official PlayOverwatch account that posts official trailers, development updates and short animated films, or fan accounts that post game commentaries, professional game analysis or funny meme montages; Youtube is a medium that allows the vast majority of the generalised Overwatch community to interact with one another. Specifically, Youtube is a medium that connects well with younger audiences that have grown up in a digital era, specifically teenagers, which in itself can be considered a sub-community of Overwatch. Youtube content creators can be seen as social influencers that shape the foundation of the decision making process of their audiences, and there is no better example of this than the relationship between these social influencers and their teenage audience. As put by Chua & Banerjee (2015) “personal opinions and experiences have become one of the most valuable sources of information to assist users in their purchase decision-making process”. When the opinions of a professional Overwatch player is shared through Youtube, and reaches the screen of a fan of said influencer, there is a great chance that said fan will copy and follow the personal opinion and review of the influencer in question. Once again we see the merge between communities found within the general Overwatch community, in this case we see the casual, teenage audience form their own opinions and ideas on a particular idea based on the influence of a social influencer, more often than not in this case a competitive, celebrity figure that belongs to a niche community of Overwatch entertainers.

 

Thus, we are presented with a correlation between the various niche communities that belong to the generalised Overwatch community as a whole. This correlation is that the various niche communities influence one another, to the point where the divergence of these communities merge back together into a singular entity. This singular community is characterised and stereotyped to have specific traits shared amongst the members of this community, and with Overwatch in particular this generalised trait would be toxic gameplay that certain players bring to the table. This is recognised even by the developers of the game in question. In a video posted to the PlayOverwatch Youtube account, lead developer Jeff Kaplan addressed the audience about the increased negative social interactions that occur between player of the game, and the steps that the team are taking to rid toxicity from the game. In the video, Kaplan states, “We have taken disciplinary action against over 480,000 accounts, and 340,000 of those were a direct result of players using the reporting system. So you can see, the vast majority of actions we take are because players have said hey, there’s another player here doing something very bad and I want to see some action” (PlayOverwatch, 2017). In regards to this video, we can see that the Overwatch community are characterised by being toxic in game. However, we can also see that this is a big problem that many individuals both inside and outside of this community want to see be dealt with.

 

We can see that Youtube is the primary medium being used to address the various Overwatch communities in question. The social influencer of the video being lead developer Jeff Kaplan is a figurehead that the majority of the player base look up to, and hearing him say that reporting toxic behaviour in Overwatch is a good step to ridding the toxicity problem in Overwatch makes the communities in question listen to this, and thus form their own opinions and ideas behind this. This in turn changes the overall attitude and behaviour within the various communities found in Overwatch into an attitude that is committed to neutralising and reducing bad player behaviours within the game. This video and the reactions of the individuals within the specific Overwatch communities that this video targets is a clear cut example of how various, niche communities still relate to one another via a singular purpose, and how the power of social influence has the ability to change specific attitudes and form opinions within communities.

 

Overall, there is a distinct correlation between online gaming, and the formation of communities and the individuals that associate themselves with online games. The various opinions, thoughts and values that are shared between members of online game communities are generally shared, with a few principle outlying values creating certain niche communities within a generalised community focusing on an online game. These opinions, thoughts and values are subject to change with the input of social influencers altering these already existing opinions, thoughts and values, and thus influence which type of community an individual may choose to associate themselves with. However, the already underlying thoughts, values and opinions that represent the entire, generalised community still exist between various niche groups, and thus allow collaboration and unity between these groups whilst retaining a sense of uniqueness present in the various niche groups found within a community.

 

 

  • Chua, A. Y., & Banerjee, S. (2015). Understanding Review Helpfulness as a Function of Reviewer Reputation, Review Rating, and Review Depth. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(2), 354-362.
  • Domahidi, Emese & Festl, Ruth & Quandt, Thorsten. (2014). To dwell among gamers: Investigating the relationship between social online game use and gaming-related friendships. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 107–115. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.023
  • Gusfield, J. R. (1975). The community: A critical response. New York: Harper Colophon.
  • McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6-23. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e5fb/8ece108aec36714ee413876e61b0510e7c80.pdf
  • PlayOverwatch (Official Game Development Youtube Account). (2017, September 13). Developer Update | Play Nice, Play Fair | Overwatch [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnfzzz8pIBE
  • Wagner, Michael. (2006). On the Scientific Relevance of eSports. 437-442. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220968200_On_the_Scientific_Relevance_of_eSports
  • Warmelink, H., & Siitonen, M. (2011). Player Communities in Multiplayer Online Games: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Proceedings of the 2011 DiGRA International Conference: Think Design Play, 6, 1-21. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3acd/d7a7402cf8c517350f9f6041c29e4b0f34ed.pdf

 

Who is getting more sex? A comparison of generations dating online.

Abstract

This conference paper discusses the impact web 2.0 has on older adults 65 years and older Online dating platforms have created communities and a space for single individuals to find potential partners. After online dating became an accepted norm it encouraged users to utilize the platform to meet new people from all over the world. It has had an increasingly positive effect for single adults 65 years and older. As social circles shrink it becomes harder for older adults to meet new people therefore resulting in them turning to social media and online dating sites (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2011). Web 2.0 has encouraged older people to go online to find relationships. Online dating sites allow older adults to find what they want in a relationship, which is commonly a low-arousal companionship however do hold sexual attraction highly (Menkin, Robles, Wiley and Gonzaga 2015). There are different sites that cater to different wants, needs and ages groups for example tinder is commonly used by younger adults whereas sites like eHarmony and Plenty of fish are used by older adults.

 

Keywords: web 2.0, online communities, online dating, perceptions, older adults, generational differences.

Web 2.0 and the acceptance of online dating

Web 2.0 is most commonly known as the ‘upgrade’ from web 1.0 (O’Reilly, 2005). Web 2.0 is commonly associated with the concept of ‘user-generated content’ (O’Reilly, 2005). User-generated content is content created by users and published online. Users of the web are no longer just reading web content but creating and participating through commenting, reacting and through own opinion blogs (O’Reilly, 2005). Web 2.0 has evolved into a participatory community where users are creating and collaborating to generate content and engagement (Karpf, 2009). Web 2.0 introduced many new and improved features and opportunities such as google AdSense, Flickr, Bit torrent, Napster, blogging, Wikipedia, tagging, online dating and many more (O’Reilly, 2005). Marwick (2013) discusses how the online community allows you to connect and communicate to other users with similar interests, who you may not have met outside of the online environment.

Web 2.0 has bought many changes to today society and how we connect, communicate. One of the major changes was to the idea of dating (Thottam, 2018). The sophistication of the internet has drastically changed the dating game over the last 10 years (Godfrey, 2011). Godfrey (2011) states that the days when a guy could simply ask a girl out on a date face-to-face or through a simple phone call are long gone. Godfrey (2011) reinforces this point by suggesting that there are now ‘unlimited options for dating and numerous tools to gain access to one’s potential soulmate’. People take time to change and adapt, especially older generations who have been so used to a certain way of doing things for so long (Thottam, 2018). When the first modern newspaper was invented, people included ads to discreetly connect and communicate with new people in hopes of finding ‘love or sex’ (Thottam, 2018). With the introduction of the internet, connecting everyone together these personal ads became digital and internet dating services were created (Thottam, 2018).

Online dating can go back to 1965 when two Harvard students used a questionnaire and an IBM 1401 to match students based on their similarities, this is considering as the beginning of match making services (Thottam, 2018). 1995, before online dating sites launched the World Wide web was available to the public to explore and meet new people (Thottam, 2018). 2000’s was an exciting time in regards to the dating atmosphere. 2000 the now popular dating site eHarmony launched, users would require to fill out a questionnaire and match with other users (Thottam, 2018). 2003 video chat channel skype was introduced making long distant relationships and meeting new people online easier, it reduced the worry about user identities through the use of live video chats (Thottam, 2018). Facebook was launched in 2004, which is not however a dating site but did majorly impact how we connect and date using the internet (Thottam, 2018). Users can now instant message and display relationships online through Facebook. 2007 bought the smart phone giving people the opportunity to communicate on the go 24/7 (Thottam, 2018). Online dating sites have since then grown to include gay dating websites and sites for those looking for different types of relationships. For example, tinder is commonly known as the ‘hook up’ app whereas sites like eHarmony are thought of a more serious commitment site.

Web 2.0 and online communities

The growth of web 2.0 signifies the change in use of internet for relational purposes (Aguiton, C., & Cardon, D. 2007). Participatory culture online encourages users who share similar interests to come together and engage in a community. Aguiton and Cardon (2007) suggest that ‘web development always contains the community ideal’. It is said that ‘common sociability and a set of roles and defined exchanges modalities gives individuals the feeling that they are part of the community and share a common vision. Web 2.0 introduced users to many different communities, the biggest being known as the blogosphere. This community is full of those who write journal like content about their interests and express opinions, allowing other users to follow, comment and co-create (Dumova & Fiordo,2012). Other online communities include social media communities, online dating communities, the wiki community and many more.

Web 2.0 has become a safe space for users to come online and be who they want to be and find those who share similar interests. Considering most people are online from many points of the world it’s a great way to find and connect with people. The online dating community has become increasing popular way to date and meet new people. Users look to online dating sites and communities like e harmony for many different reasons but mainly to find potential partners and to meet new people. Online dating communities have eased the dating process of finding new people, dating sites allow those who identify as gay or lesbian to find potential partners and also who are the same age (Clemen, atkin, Krishnan, 2015). It is now not uncommon to find someone online (Chappetta & Barth, 2016). The online dating community brings together those with similar interests and same goals allowing users to connect and communicate with like-minded people.

There are many different online dating sites which cater to different users and their different needs. Younger generations usually go for sites like tinder or grinder and look for casual relationships. Whereas middle aged adults commonly look to eHarmony.com. match.com and many more, these sites match members according to similarities shared between the two (Chappetta, & Barth, 2016). Sites that match members by their similarities allow the couples to know their personalities and interests before meeting (Chappetta, & Barth, 2016). Older adults commonly use eHarmony.com or plenty of fish (POF.com) as their online dating platform as it is more popular within an age group of adults 65+. Online dating is used by a small, but growing section of the aging population, this is evident with the numerous advertisements for ‘50-plus dating sites’ such as OurTime.com and SeniorPeopleMeet.com (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). Match.com (2010) finds that adults 50-plus are the fastest growing segment of users and are an ‘increasing segment of the single population’ (Cooney & Dunne, 2001, as cited in McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). Online dating sites have become the most common way for adults over 50 to meet their marital partners (Gonzaga, 2010 as cited in McWilliams & Barrett, 2014).

Online Dating and Older Generations

According to Chappetta, & Barth (2016), an online dating profile is generally a “public website that other users of the online dating website can access and find information about that user”. The type of information that these profiles consists includes age, gender, location, ethnicity, height and body type, education, career and many more (Chappetta, & Barth, 2016). Online dating profiles allow users to present themselves the way they want to drawing on ‘past, present and future selves’ to create desired image (Ellison, Hancock, Toma, 2012). Identity expression is influenced by the perception of the audience, and the online dating community expects certain information to be shared (Marwick, 2013). Online dating sites are good for those “seeking companionship, sexual partners, romance, freedom from commitment and ease of meeting new people” and the reason for using online dating services will vary with each individual and with different age groups (Clemens, Atkin, Krishnan, 2015).

Menkin, Robles, Wiley and Gonzaga (2015) have found that overall users value ‘interpersonal communication more than sex’. Older users rated sexual attraction as slightly less important than younger users did, however they still highly valued the goal (Menkin, Robles, Wiley and Gonzaga 2015). A survey showed that singles aged 40-69 believe that sexual fulfillment was an important goal for many dating older adults (Menkin, Robles, Wiley and Gonzaga 2015). Menkin, Robles, Wiley and Gonzaga (2015) state that because older adults prefer low-arousal (e.g., calm) rather than a high-arousal positive emotions older adults tend to have greater preference for companionship relative to sexual attraction.

Different age groups have different perceptions and experiences towards online dating. Age is a common variable to consider when looking into the pursuit of online romances (Stephure, Boon, MacKinnon, & Deveau, 2009). Younger individuals will find that using online dating sites as a norm and an extension of their online usage (Stephure, Boon, MacKinnon, & Deveau, 2009). However, with a greater number of older individuals becoming single, motivations to seek new partners’ increases, encouraging them to go online (Stephure, Boon, MacKinnon, & Deveau, 2009). Little attention and study goes into single dating older adults due to the idea of them ‘lacking interest in intimate, particularly sexual relationships’ however many older adults enjoy dating and desire companionship (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014).

Stereotypes of older adults aged 65+ as ‘socially withdrawn or asexual’ ignore that fact that social norms are constantly changing and ‘shifting cohort demographics, it is increasingly common for ‘single older adults to be involved in dating and romantic relationships’ (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2011). Opportunities to develop close relationships often reduce as social networks shrink because of ‘retirement, relocation and the death of friends and loved ones’ (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2011). Due to this increased social isolation older adults are increasingly turning to social media and online dating sites to enhance their social networks. Many unmarried older adults are seen to actively participate and enjoy online dating and desire companionship (McWilliams, Barrett, 2014).

Online Versus Offline Dating

Online dating has affected the way people date and find potential partners. Online dating is fundamentally different to offline date and it can promote better romantic outcomes than conventional offline dating. Intimacy is developed at a faster rate online through online dating sites and communicating online than in a face-to-face setting (Chappetta, & Barth, 2016).  The online setting allows users to find out interests and values quicker than in a face-to-face setting which is helpful for many users especially aging adults who may want to skip the slow ‘getting to know you’ period which many young and new relationships go through. many older adults, 65 and older are commonly widows and widowers are interested in dating turn to computers to enhance their chance of meeting someone (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2011). Stephure, Boon, MacKinnon, & Deveau (2009) state that due to the dating challenges older adults face, internet and online dating site users increase with age.

Online awareness within older adults can be said to be a reaction to social isolation (Thompson, 2008). Social media platforms allow users to constantly update their status and their day-to-day routines for their followers of friends to see (O’Reilly, Milstein, 2011). This results in a feeling of being in touch and a ‘lightweight but meaningful connection’ commonly known as ‘ambient intimacy’ (O’Reilly, Milstein, 2011). Ambient intimacy becomes a way to ‘feel less alone’ and as a part of a community. This is very important for the older generation to feel connected and a part of a community.

Conclusion

Online dating has fostered a dating community within the older generation involving single adults 65 years and older. It provides the aging adults a space to find and connect with new people and gives them a chance they wouldn’t usually get in reality. This virtual space works to make the users feel accepted and safe as everyone using this platform is on there for the same reason. Older generations use different online dating sites than younger generations, this allows them to not feel judged by the younger users but also to refine their search for love to those similar to their age and who are at the same point in life. Older generations are often perceived as lacking in love life and online dating helps fight this stereotype. Online dating has ultimately stepped up the dating game and has encouraged communities to form and users to come together. Older generations are able to use online dating sites to enhance their social circle and meet potential partners. Studies show that users value interpersonal communication rather than sex however sexual attraction and satisfaction is still an important goal (Menkin, Robles, Wiley and Gonzaga 2015). Web 2.0 has influenced single older adults to join online dating sites as single adults are increasingly wanting to be involved in dating and romantic relationship (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2011).

References:

Aguiton, C., & Cardon, D. (2007). The Strength of Weak Cooperation: An Attempt to Understand the Meaning of Web 2.0. Communications & Strategies, 65(1). Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1009070

Alterovitz, S. S. R., & Mendelsohn, G. A. (2011). Partner preferences across the life span: Online dating by older adults.

Chappetta, K. C., & Barth, J. M. (2016). How gender role stereotypes affect attraction in an online dating scenario. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 738-746. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.006

Clemens, C., Atkin, D., & Krishnan, A. (2015). The influence of biological and personality traits on gratifications obtained through online dating websites. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 120-129. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.058

Dumova, T. and Fiordo, R. (eds.), (2012). Blogging in the global society: Cultural, political and geographical aspects, Hershey: IGI Global (available via library database) http://www.igi-global.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/gateway/book/49568

Ellison, N. B., Hancock, J. T., & Toma, C. L. (2012). Profile as promise: A framework for conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-presentations. New Media & Society, 14(1), 45-62. doi:10.1177/1461444811410395

Godfrey, R. (2011, Jun 23). Dating in the 21st century. Canadian Jewish NewsRetrieved from https://search-proquestcom.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/879079097?accountid=10382

Karpf, D. (2009). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, by Axel Bruns: New York: Peter Lang, 2008, 405 pages (Vol. 6, pp. 81-83): Taylor & Francis Group.

Marwick, A. E. (2013) Online Identity, in A Companion to New Media Dynamics (eds J. Hartley, J. Burgess and A. Bruns), Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK. doi: 10.1002/9781118321607.ch23

McWilliams, S., & Barrett, A. E. (2014). Online Dating in Middle and Later Life:Gendered Expectations and Experiences. Journal of Family Issues, 35(3), 411-436. doi:10.1177/0192513×12468437

Menkin, J. A., Robles, T. F., Wiley, J. F., & Gonzaga, G. C. (2015). Online Dating Across the Life Span: Users’ Relationship Goals. Psychology and Aging. doi:10.1037/a0039722

O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Retrieved from http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html?page=1

O’Reilly, T., & Milstein, S. (2011). The twitter book. ” O’Reilly Media, Inc.”.

Stephure, R. J., Boon, S. D., MacKinnon, S. L., & Deveau, V. L. (2009). Internet Initiated Relationships: Associations between Age and Involvement in Online Dating. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(3), 658-681. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01457.x

Thottam, I. (2018). The history of online dating retrieved from https://www.eharmony.com/history-of-online-dating/

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

Fortnite: The Viral Success of Socially Competitive Online Multiplayer Games and their Communities

Abstract

This paper aims to investigate the power social capital holds in cross-platform online gaming communities, and argues that socially completive multiplayer games are more popular because of their development of social capital. Fortnite: Battle Royale, although a relatively new game, is a prime example of how the cross-platform communities have resulted in the viral success of a game. This paper explores the theory of communities, both online and offline, and their relationship to socially competitive multiplayer gaming.  It will discuss the different types of gaming communities and how they span across numerous different platforms. It will also discuss the social capital that is held by members of the Fortnite: Battle Royale (Fortnite) community and how the community has grown since the game’s first release.

Fortnite: The Viral Success of Socially Competitive Online Multiplayer Games and their Communities

The transition from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 has led to the creation of a more collaborative and interactive Internet. Web 2.0 is about the development of communication and content that was not possible in Web 1.0 (Davis, 2009). Online multiplayer games are a development of Web 2.0 that have been able to combine console gaming systems (such as the PlayStation 4) with the Internet to create a unique online experience. This paper aims to discuss how the popularity of socially competitive online multiplayer games have impacted on the cross-platform communities surrounding the games and the social capital these communities hold. We will be examining online multiplayer games that are considered to be competitive but are also used for social interaction between players. These online multiplayer games have resulted in the formation of communities that exist outside the gaming consoles and games itself, and can be found across multiple different platforms online. These communities that are formed around a game create social capital that both individuals and the community hold. Katz defines social capital as a set of shared values and expectations that a community holds. It is about the power people hold through their social networks and the value that is placed on that power (Katz 2004). Social capital is especially important in gaming communities as it revolves around trust and cooperation. This paper will discuss how the popularity of an online socially competitive multiplayer game can result in social capital that spreads across communities that are established in different platforms across the Internet. Using the free-to-play online game ‘Fortnite: Battel Royale’ (Fortnite) as an example of a socially competitive online multiplayer game that players have formed communities in, not only, the game platform itself (PlayStation 4) but across multiple other platforms as well (Twitter, YouTube, Instagram etc.). Fortnite: Battle Royale is a third-person shooter, survival game. It involves up to 100 players (who can play solo or in squads of two or four) that compete to be the last man standing (“Epic Games’ Fortnite”, n.d.).   The game involves a vast selection of weapons that are scattered across the map and a constantly shrinking safe zone that executes lethal damage to player’s health when caught outside it. Building aspects incorporated into the gameplay elevates this game above similar games within the genre. Players can destroy objects in the environment to collect materials that allow them to build defenses to protect themselves or to help them travel (“Epic Games’ Fortnite”, n.d.).

Community Theory and Practice

Community is a social system. It relies on the social interaction, common ties and psycho-cultural bonds that link people together (Katz, 2004). A community is a network of people whose social interactions have formed a group of likeminded people who support one another. Communities can exist in both the physical and virtual environments, sometimes switching between the two. Online communities can break through barriers that physical communities may have, like geographical location, gender, race, ethnicity and age (Katz & Rice, 2002). The absence of these barriers allows for the online space to create communities that thrive on the diversity of common interests and goals that create a sense of belonging for an individual. Katz discusses four types of communities: traditional communities, imaginary communities, pseudo communities and social networks (Katz, 2004).  Traditional communities are closely linked with the design of physical communities. They promote the ideas of co-dependency and commonness, achieving a collective purpose. Social networks are about the communities formed online, they are about individuals and their personal networks; what communities they choose to be a part of. This type of community provides a sense of belong for the individual who has now become the center of their own community (Katz, 2004). Imagined communities are formed online but are still linked to the physical world (Katz, 2004). These communities encompass the ideas of social networks while creating an imagined form of sentiment in the physical world (Katz, 2004). And lastly, pseudo communities have very similar characteristics to that of a traditional community but, are formed virtually rather than in a physical geo-graphical location (Katz, 2004). Fortnite: Battle Royale can be considered a social network, because the majority of the communities surrounding the game are only present online, and focuses on the individual experience within that community. However, smaller Fortnite communities could also be considered imagined communities. These imagined communities can be seen where smaller communities are formed in the physical world to play together, and discuss the game.

Virtual communities are often seen to produce what are known as ‘weak ties’. Weak ties describe distant or casual relationships (Porter, 2015). Typically formed online, weak ties link individuals to a plethora of information across social networks and communities. This information exchange within communities can be important in online gaming communities as it can help players to advance in the games and facilitates player-to-player interaction. Communication is a key part of communities and often results in weak ties converting into stronger, more personal ties. The compelling nature of online gaming communities is that a community focused around one specific game does not have to live within the confides of that gaming platform. The social aspect of gaming has allowed for communities to form outside of the parameters of an online multiplayer game. For example, the communities centered around Fortnite are not only distributed between the platforms of the gaming console such as forums and chats but appear on other online platforms. These platforms range from streaming and video content on Twitch (a live video streaming platform) and YouTube, to microblogging sites like Twitter and discussion websites like Reddit. Each of these platforms contribute to a much larger overarching community solely dedicated and invested in Fortnite. These communities allow players to form social connections and Koivisto argues that it is the reason why players continue to play a game (Koivisto, 2003). Communities allow players to express themselves, and create discussions and their own content surrounding a game. This is also closely linked with the social capital surrounding online gaming communities and the power it can hold.

Social Capital and Online Multiplayer Gaming

The popularity of online multiplayer games is based on its social aspects.  Games, such as Fortnite, can become very competitive but still facilitate sociality through head-set conversations and online multiplayer team battles. Social capital has become an import concept in the formation of social interactions and relationships online (Trepte et al., 2012). It has many effects on communities and the individual members in that community. Social capital builds support, trust, and cooperation (Trepte et al., 2012). It helps participants to solve collective problems, widens the awareness of interconnectivity between people, increases trust and aids the process of communication (Putnam, 2000). Examples of the significance of social capital is demonstrated in cross-platform communities around Fortnite, and the value the communities place in members of that community. Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Reddit, Facebook, Twitch and numerous other platforms have facilitated the creation of these communities. To show the scale of these communities you can look at the follower size of Fortnite on Twitter and Twitch. The official Twitter account of the game has over 2.2 million followers and connects with players by providing them with updates, news and replying to the community’s queries and questions (“Fortnite (@FortniteGame)”, n.d.). On Twitch, there are over 10.4 million followers of Fortnite streams and videos.  On platforms such as Twitch, and YouTube, a video sharing platform, have created Fortnite communities around popular content creators. The number one Twitch streamer, ‘ninja’, has been claimed as a “god” in the Fortnite community (Nattrass, 2018). With an unprecedented 108 million channel views and over 4.4 million subscribers, ninja has established himself as an esteemed member of the Fortnite community. YouTubers such as ‘Ali-A’, ‘elrubiousOMG’, ‘Willyrex’ and ‘ninja’ (again) are also prominent with between 6-28 million subscribers apiece (“Top 250 YouTubers games Channels”, 2018). These gamers have built their social capital around the Fortnite community. Their popularity is not just equated to the entertainment they provide, but also the sense of belonging and support other players subscribe to. These cross-platform communities are the reason why socially competitive online multiplayer games are so virally popular.

Popularised Online Multiplayer Games

In 2018 PlayStation released statistics of their top ten downloaded games. This includes Call of Duty: WWII, Grand Theft Auto V, NBA 2K18 and Rocket League (Massongill, 2018). Each of these games involve both an offline single player and/or multiplayer mode, as well as an online peer-to-peer multiplayer mode. However, the second highest downloaded game of 2017, Horizon Zero Dawn, only supported an online-only multiplayer mode, rather than offline single player and multiplayer modes. The popularity of these games may be contributed to a multitude of factors, but it is the sociability of the online multiplayer aspects that become a highlighting factor. PlayStation consoles offer a chat system they call ‘party’. Creating a party allows for individuals to voice and text chat with their PlayStation friends, and other players, whilst in a game or using other PlayStation applications (“About parties”, n.d.). Parties are an important aspect of gaming as it allows players to socialise with their friends and the wider gaming community. Players can connect with each other, and this facilitates the manifestation of relationships outside the limitation of geographical location. This social side of gaming is one of the strongest motivators for players to continue playing a game, and forms both pseudo communities and social networks (Trepte et al., 2012).

The success of Fortnite has been swift. It’s accessibility and competitiveness has led to its rise as one of the most popular online socially competitive multiplayer games. On February 4th 2018 Fortnite’s servers crashed when the game hit a peak of 3.4 million concurrent players (Nunneley, 2018). This rapid scale of growth since the game was released in September 2017 was unimaginable for the game developers. With over 45 million players it has stood out against other popular games. It has been labelled as a “relationship building, strategic masterpiece of warfare”, as it has enabled social bonding and team building that isn’t as possible in other online multiplayer games (Fortnite: An exploration of a cultural phenomenon, 2018). These statistics show that it is clear that the game is widely popular and the communities have a large span, but it is also important to acknowledge the smaller communities that form inside these larger ones. Individuals may only participate in their own personal social networks. They may only talk to people that they already know offline and do not want to socialise with players that they do not know. These smaller communities may not come in participate directly with the larger communities but by association they are contributing to the overarching community of Fortnite, and online multiplayer gaming communities as a whole. However, some scholars note that these gaming communities can result in an increase in anti-social behaviour (Trepte et al., 2012). It can form addictions, increase isolation and deteriorate offline relationships between players and their peers (Trepte et al., 2012).

Conclusion

Communities are a key part of humanity. They create networks of individuals who have come together to bond over their common interests and connect with people.  The support and security they provide were once limited to geographical location but now, with the arrival of Web 2.0, communities span across all areas of life. People can find their own space within the Internet that celebrates their interests with other like-minded individuals. Gaming communities are just one example of the vast network of communities that exist online. The pseudo communities provide support for gamers and creates relationships between players that may not have existed otherwise. Online socially competitive multiplayer games promote sociability and builds social capital between gamers. Players are able to converse not only through the game itself but across different platforms on the Internet. Through livestreams, gamers like ‘ninja’ and ‘Ali-A’ are able to showcase their abilities and provide help and insight into the games they play. The popularity of socially competitive games are tied to the online multiplayer aspect they provide. Games like Fortnite: Battle Royale have become viral because of the community that has formed around the game. The players have found something that they love to play and are sharing that with the people around them, both online and offline.

References

About parties | PlayStation®4 User’s Guide. Manuals.playstation.net. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps4/party/about_party.html

Davis, C. (2009). Web 2.0 definition, usage, and self -efficacy: A study of graduate library school students and academic librarians at colleges and universities with ALA accredited degree programs. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/304844103?accountid=10382

Epic Games’ Fortnite. Epic Games’ Fortnite. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/home

Fortnite (@FortniteGame). Twitter.com. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/with_replies?lang=en

Fortnite: An exploration of a cultural phenomenon. (2018). University Wire Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/2001674512?accountid=10382

Katz, J.E., & Rice, R.E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement and interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

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. Annals of the International Communication Association, Vol.28(1), p.315-371. https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1080/23808985.2004.11679039

Koivisto, E. (2003). Supporting Communities in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games by Game Design. Paper presented at the Digital Games Research Association Conference. http://www.digra.org/dl/db/05150.48442.pdf

Massongill, J. (2018). PlayStation Store: The Top Downloads of 2017. PlayStation.Blog. Retrieved from https://blog.us.playstation.com/2018/01/05/playstation-store-the-top-downloads-of-2017/

Nattrass, J. (2018). Ninja: Everything you need to know about the Fortnite God and Twitch star. Metro.co.uk. Retrieved from http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/16/who-is-fortnite-god-ninja-and-just-how-is-this-twitch-megastar-making-at-least-350000-from-gaming-7391914/

Nunneley, S. (2018). Fortnite hit 3.4M concurrent players last weekend and the servers couldn’t handle the pressure. VG247. Retrieved from https://www.vg247.com/2018/02/08/fortnite-3-4-million-concurrent-players-servers-crashed/

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

Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (pp. 288-289). New York: Simon & Schuster.

Top 250 YouTubers Games Channels. (2018). Socialblade.com. Retrieved from https://socialblade.com/youtube/top/category/games/mostsubscribed

Trepte, S. Reinecke, L. and Juechems, K. (2012). The social side of gaming: How playing online computer games creates online and offline social support. Computers in Human Behavior, vol.28(3), p.832-839. DOI: 10.1016/jchb.2011.12.003

Header image retrieved from: Alpha Coders

© 2018 Briana Marino. All Rights Reserved.

Instagram has provided a platform for social influencers to create a false sense of wants and needs among young adult women

Abstract 

This conference paper examines the social media app, Instagram and how it has provided the ideal platform for social influencers to create a false sense of wants and needs among young adult women today. It delves into the reasons why Instagram provides a place in which it makes this possible. The factors that contribute to a user becoming an influencer, and the profound effect the images uploaded on this platform have on women and their desires. The paper will disclose some of the biggest social influencers active on Instagram today and the impact they are having on young women and the decisions they make as a result of being exposed to these glimpses of influencers’ lives. The paper will consider the numerous effects influencers have on young adult women, from the clothes they purchase, to the holidays they go book, the fitness trends they partake in and more. The paper will also consider how the images portrayed on Instagram do not always portray the reality of the influencer; they are created to reflect a certain image they want followers to perceive.

Keywords:

Social Media, Instagram, Identity, Influencer, Image

Thesis statement:

Instagram has provided a platform for social influencers to create a false sense of wants and needs among young adult women.

Social media platform, Instagram, has provided a platform for social influencers to create a false sense of wants and needs among young adult women by providing influencers (including celebrities) with a platform to portray a lifestyle filled with everything someone could or should possibly desire. This includes everything from holidays, fashion, cars, beauty and health products and procedures that the impressionable and easily-influenced young adult women yearn for — to be more like the influencers everyone admires so much. Firstly I will discuss what a social influencer is and give examples of a few of the most popular ones today. Secondly I will discuss how influencers use the social media platform Instagram to achieve this status. Thirdly the effect these influencers have on young women’s wants and needs. Finally I will discuss how young women shape their identity and self-worth is shaped by influencers.

It is not a new concept that young adult women, who might arguably be easily influenced, look up to others who seemingly “have it all.” The Kardashian-Jenner family craze is a good example of this. The family who originally rose to fame with a reality show based on their everyday lives now has a cult following of young adult women across all their social media platforms, including Instagram. In turn, the members of this family all make a profitable living from their social media platforms by promoting products on their accounts.

“…the Kardashian-Jenner family members can bring in a sizable income with very minimal effort just by using their social media accounts,” (Kirst, S, 2015).

The Kardashian-Jenner family is just one example. There are numerous young attractive people on Instagram that aren’t classified as a celebrity, but have just as much influence by simply portraying a life that makes others envious. Back before Web 2.0, young adults used to seek information about these people in magazines and television interviews. However, the introduction of social media, in particular the Instagram platform, has allowed young adult women to gain a more in-depth insight into these people aka influencers and their world by building a connection with them that was not available to them previously.

Another good example of a well-known social influencer on Instagram today is Australian fitness guru Kayla Itsines, who has impacted women’s fitness with her Bikini Body Guides. She has a huge following of 9.5 million resulting from the BBG fitness movement which has seen women around the world upload their weight loss progress photos depicting the results they’ve had by using Kayla’s guides. A whole online community has evolved from this and Kayla has a high interaction rate with followers by reposting their progress photos on her account.

Whether young adult women interact with these influencers or simply double tap the photo to like it, they are connected in a way they never were before. Young adults are now privy to their world, to what they get up to on a daily basis, where they go for their morning coffee, which F45 they exercise at, what they eat for breakfast, where they go on holiday and what brand of clothing they wear to that destination. “Instagram provides information about a vast amount of other people, what they are doing, and how they are feeling.” (Vries, Moller, Wieringa, Eigenraam and Hamelink, 2017, p.3).

If followers admire an influencer’s perfect skin, they can purchase the skincare range they use, if they admire their physique, then, they can look at their Instagram profile and see what exercise program they do, according to what appears on their feed that is. For example, if someone wanted lips like Kylie Jenner, they can purchase her Kylie Cosmetics Lip Kit. If someone desired to have the same physique as Kayla Itsines, they can download her Bikini Body Guide.

Unlike magazines and television, which young adult women solely relied on in the past to keep up-to-date with influencers, social media platforms like Instagram allow participants to be visible through their self-created profile and links to another network of connections. These connections are simply made by hitting the follow button. It is why Instagram is quite different to other forms of social media (particularly Facebook and LinkedIn) as it does not require someone to have a large friendship or acquaintance group to begin with, in order to grow a significant following. People simply have to have an interest in a certain account’s content. The use of hashtags on Instagram has made it easy for people to find images and accounts with specific themes or content that pertains to their interests. Because all Instagram influencers’ profiles are set to public, they are visible to everyone which has allowed people to easily connect with them on a more intimate level for the first time ever.

However, these influencers are quite insignificant without interaction from their extensive following

The text Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites (boyd 2006) states that the role of followers assist greatly in the building of a person’s online profile and the more connections we have, the greater opportunity there is to interact with others; and this rings true for Influencers, who all have a significant following and therefore have more credibility and clout over someone who just has a handful of followers.

Further to this, Donath and boyd (2004) talks about the importance of growing a network.

“Being the bridge between two otherwise disconnected people or groups is a strategically important role (Burt 2000) particularly if there is valuable information or opportunities to be shared between them. The Bridge, being connected to these disparate groups, has access to a broad range of information.” (p.71).

In this case, Instagram is the “bridge” that allows people to exchange information through images and a sentence or two that captions the image. This was simply not possible before. Instagram has allowed people with similar interests to come together from all over the world. It allows them to share ideas, advice and influence others with the images they capture and share. There is a lot of competition when it comes to Instagram as there are so many accounts to choose from to follow. The content shared by the Influencer needs to remain relevant and interesting in order to retain and increase their following.

The connection between followers and influencers was deemed so important that Instagram debut the all-important blue tick of verification of an account belonging to a celebrity or social influencer. Introduced in August 2017, this tick ensured that users were following and interacting with the “real” influencer. An article produced by UK’s Metro at this time explained the tick as being important for the Instagram platform:

“Verified means that the profile that has been confirmed by the social media platform that it is the official profile for that person, or brand that it represents. This is particularly useful for famous people, so you know you are following the person you intended to and not some phoney.” (Moloney, 2017)

This blue tick was a way of giving influencers authenticity, however it does not necessarily mean their posts will be as well. A lot of influencers are in fact paid to feature products, services, etc. to post on their Instagram.

Kirst discusses how at first glance, Kylie Jenner’s Instagram looks like homogenous photos of the influencer, but there’s much more to it.

“…when you look a little closer – and read the captions on her photos – you realize the pictures can actually be broken into two categories: Gratuitous or endorsed. From waist trainers to false eyelashes, from fashion lines to mattresses, Kylie does not discriminate.”

So, although these influencers might not actually use these products, they portray them in a way that they do. However it would be unfair to say that all social influencers use their position to promote everything and anything for money.

Either way, these posts from influencers have a powerful effect on young adult women, giving them a false sense of want and need to buy the product or use the service regardless.

As of March 1, 2017 social media influencers were made to be more transparent about what products were advertising, and what products they were promoting because they genuinely used and liked.

“…under new advertising standards, social media “influencers” have to clearly label their sponsored content. It means that, for the first time in Australia, you will have a pretty good idea whether the post in your Instagram feed has been paid for by a brand. The new code by the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) covers all social media platforms, and any kind of social media user.” (Putill, 2017)

However, these products are still being featured by an influencer in a way that make followers desire them, thus creating a false sense of wants and needs.

For example, you can practice yoga in an old t-shirt and unflattering bike pants and get the same benefit from the workout as someone wearing the latest Lululemon attire.

Lululemon even have brand ambassadors that are active in the yoga scene. So the majority of yoga posts you find on Instagram are associated with the brand which further reinforces this image and a false sense of needing the clothing to partake in the activity.

A picture can convey much more than words which is why the Instagram platform is so effective. It is different to other social media platforms available today as it is predominately image-based, with text being secondary. As a result, people put more time and effort, not to mention filters, into getting the perfect photo to portray the moment in time, which will have a bigger impact on followers and make them want to buy that dress, drink that coffee from the café or visit a certain day spa for a particular facial, so that they too, can live like the person they look up to – that is, the influencer.

Even though it is focussed on images, people are able to leave comments and direct message people, and just recently post live updates, which allows for a lot more interactions between users than when the platform was first released.

Although the tagging feature is available to let followers know the place they are at and the brand of clothes etc. that feature in the image, it is the comments and direct message capability of Instagram that allows them to further communicate with the influencer to ask more about the clothing they might be wearing in the image. For example, what shop, what size they are wearing, if it’s good quality etc. all the typical questions someone would have before making a purchase. It works with everything the influencer would post about, whether it is a facial they had a particular day spa, the skincare they use on a regular basis or the gym class they just posted about attending. Due to an influencer’s extensive following and the trust they build via the two-way interactive relationship allows consumers to feel as if they are making a more informed decision when making a purchase. Influencers are deemed a credible source for information. (Glucksman, 2017).

This is why people take their advice or simply what they have to say on-board and immediately feel confident in purchasing or trying whatever the influencer has posted about.

Regardless of whether these followers actively participate by commenting, liking or direct messaging their connections, they still make up part of this community and can still be influenced by what is posted by the influencers they follow.

Pearson describes this interaction well in All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks with the statement:

“Performance in mediated spaces, such as those found in Web 2.0 and SNS, is an interlocution (Burnett, 2000). As such, it requires willing and engaged participation in mediated exchanges. Whilst it is true that users can lurk, even watching a performance constitutes a form of engagement.” (Pearson, 2009)

So, although followers might not interact with an influencer, it is possible to see an impressive, carefully filtered image that captures attention. In this instance, it could be a photo of an influencer at a new bar, you can then ‘follow’ the Instagram account for that bar and then later go to the bar with a sense of urgency just because it appeared on an influencers account, not necessarily because you really need to.

Overall influencers portray a life of almost perfection, in which “everyday” young adult women aspire to. By letting followers into their worlds, influencers are giving them desires that they might not have even thought of before or realised that they needed. A lot of what is seen is a highlights reel of the influencer’s life, mundane tasks, or actions are photographed in a way that makes it looks far more exciting than it is portrayed through filters.

More often than not, the typical young adult women feel the need to live up to these unrealistic expectations after following the influencers’ accounts.

“Individuals compare themselves and their lives to others based on the information they receive about these others. Given the vast amounts of social information that social media offer, it is not surprising that university students said in interviews that they compared themselves to others on social media.” (Doyle et al., 2017)

However they will be persuaded to use the same beauty product, or perhaps undertake the influencer’s fitness campaign in order to be more like them in some shape, way or form or perhaps be inspired to pursue the same career or have the same ambitions as someone they follow.

In the paper entitled Public displays on connection (Donath and boyd, 2004) it reaffirms this and touches on how these platforms and displays facilitate these connections. It states:

“Social networks – our connections with other people – have many important functions. They are sources of emotional and financial support, and of information about jobs, other people, and the world at large. The types of social networks that develop in different communities have a profound effect on the way people work, the opportunities they have, and the structure of their daily life.” (Donath and boyd, 2004, p.1).

Instagram definitely provides the ideal platform for connections and with people that we normally would not be able to connect with before its existence. As a result, like Donath and Boyd said, it has a “profound effect on daily life,” (Donath and boyd, 2004).

Social media platforms in general have produced a generation of people who document their everyday living on their Instagram accounts. It is a common occurrence to see people publicly taking selfies with their cocktails, at the beach, or out shopping, similar to those influencers they so eagerly follow. As a result, a lot of young adults today base their worth upon the number of likes and followers they have on their Instagram accounts.

To draw on Pearson’s reading again entitled, All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks it refers to this display of people’s lives on social media as the glass bedroom. The text states that:

“The metaphor can take a number of forms, but at its core it describes a bedroom with walls made of glass. Inside the bedroom, private conversations and intimate exchanges occur, each with varying awareness of distant friends and strangers moving past transparent walls that separate groups from more deliberate and constructed ‘outside’ displays. The glass bedroom itself is not an entirely private space, nor a true backstage space as Goffman articulated, though it takes on elements of both over the course of its use.” (Pearson, 2009.)

This reading gives a rather accurate description of Instagram and the way people, in particular Influencers utilise the social media platform in a way that sees them only sharing images that depict them in a light they want to be viewed, allowing them to control what is presented to the audience.

As a result, social media and Instagram in particular is often referred to as someone’s “highlights reel” – people are viewing all the good things happening in someone’s life and this is not always accurate.

Many young adult women of today have a desire to be an influencer themselves. Instagram has seen the emergence of people making a living from sponsored posts. Influencers get paid by companies to feature products on their in order to market them to their extensive following. This creates a false sense of needs and wants among the young adults following them. While achieving celebrity status might not be within reach for most people, it is more likely they can be like their favourite influencer and have “it all” – just like them.

Lifestyle envy is the psychological term that explains the feeling that someone gets when they see a picture on Instagram that they want. It is this comparison young adult women feel when scrolling through Instagram that gives them a false sense of needs and wants.

Young adult women do not need things, or products to be happy, but Instagram is shaped in a way that influences them to believe they do.

As a result, Instagram has indeed provided a platform for social influencers to create a false sense of wants and needs among young adult women. It is almost forced upon us, sometimes subliminally to want what they have and more.

 

References:

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

Carbone, A. Wolf Millionaire, The psychology behind your Instagram post. Retrieved from http://blog.wolfmillionaire.com/psychology-behind-instagram-post/

Donath, J., & boyd, d. (2004). Public Displays of Connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71-82. Retrieved from

http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/Donath/socialnetdisplay.draft.pdf

Glucksman, M (2017). The rise of social media influencer marketing on lifestyle branding: A case study of Lucie Fink. https://www.elon.edu/u/academics/communications/journal/wp-content/uploads/sites/153/2017/12/08_Lifestyle_Branding_Glucksman.pdf

Moloney, A. (2017, August 17). What does the blue tick on Instagram mean. Metro. Retrieved from

http://metro.co.uk/2017/08/11/what-does-the-blue-tick-on-instagram-mean-6843460/

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/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2162/2127

Purtill, J. (2017, 3, 2) Instafamous must reveal #ads under new transparency rules. ABC’s Triple J Hack. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/social-influencers-must-reveal-ad-under-new-transparency-rules/8315962

The biggest, most popular Instagram influencers for 2018. (2018). Retrieved from http://mediakix.com/2016/08/top-instagram-influencers-for-2016/#gs.O8NddII

Vries, Moller, Wieringa, Eigenraam and Hamelink (2017). Social comparison as the thief of joy: Emotional consequences of viewing strangers’ Instagram posts. Media Psychology. Volume 21 (issue 2). Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15213269.2016.1267647?src=recsys

Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Net surfers don’t ride alone: Virtual community as community. In P. Kollock & M. Smith (Eds.), Communities and Cyberspace. New York: Routledge. Retrieved from http://groups.chass.utoronto.ca/netlab/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Net-Surfers-Dont-Ride-Alone-Virtual-Community-as-Community.pdf

 

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

The Social Capital of SMIs in the Consumerist Realm

Abstract:
            Social Media Influencers (SMIs) play a growing and important role within the consumerist realm. The wealth of SMIs social capital lies in the number of followers they have who are loyal patrons to the SMIs brand. Companies have realised they need to take advantage of the power of SMIs’ social capital to successfully advertise their goods and services in the modern market. Specifically, paid partnerships and brand collaborations are the main avenue that SMIs and brands are optimizing their reach. SMI and micro-celebrity Sarah Stevenson, popularly known as Sarah’s Day on social network sites, is used as an example to portray the way these marketing techniques are launched on platforms such as Instagram and YouTube. It is evident from the examples provided, complimented by scholarly theory that it is mutually beneficial, financially and social capitally, for SMIs and enterprises to work together.
Introduction:

The virtual revolution through the rise of social networking opened an entire new perspective on online commerce. Now, more than ten years on from the birth of social media networking, the fine-tuned tools of technology are beginning to create a market shift in world of advertising. The market is now saturated with advertising plastered across every orifice, which is desensitizing customers. It is becoming clearer that traditional forms of media promotion, such as television, newspaper, radio and magazine advertising are quickly becoming outdated. This has left establishments scrambling to find the next wave of marketing techniques to sell their latest products and services while re-finding the attention of their consumers, leading to partnerships with Social Media Influencers (SMIs) to access their community of followers. SMIs are the new form of “micro-celebrity,” exposing their personal brand online to their thousands of faithful followers (Khamis et al., 2016; Hearn & Schoenoff, 2016). The term “micro-celebrity” is now becoming synonymous with SMIs and is defined as “mind-set and a set of practices that courts attention through insights into its practitioners’ private lives, and a sense of realness that renders their narratives, their branding, both accessible and intimate” (Khamis et al., 2016, p.202). Companies now realise the social capital that SMIs create through their followers can highly valuable in branding and marketing. This paper will discuss the importance of optimizing SMIs community of social capital to create effective and successful sales for brands on social networks such as Instagram and YouTube.

 

Social Networks and Social Media Influencers:

With social networking becoming ubiquitous within our lives its capabilities have a powerful influence over how we construct our existence. Whether that is entertainment, socialization, play or information sharing, social networking sites have become the platform where an increasing amount of our activity plays out (Langlois, 2016). These days, a potential “worldwide audience” is at the fingertips of anyone that has to access to a smartphone (Dijkmands et al., 2015, p.58). SMIs have capitalized on this possibility by exposing themselves to the online world and in return for their “micro-celebrity” status they have received an overwhelming response of support in the form of followers. More and Lingam (2017) define SMIs as

“any person who reviews product, posts a blog about a new product, any industry expert or any person who has a potential to influence people” (p.1).

Therefore a SMI can be anyone with social media platforms that have a few thousand followers to a few hundred thousand followers. Influencers are formed over time, not born instantly, through designing themselves on their social networks through their own original and reliable personal brand (Hearn & Schoenhoff, 2016, p.194). Although it may be thought that the basis SMIs influence lacks credibility and depth, Freberg et al. (2011) found in a survey that SMIs were believed to have similar qualities to CEOs. SMIs were “perceived as smart, ambitious, productive, poised, power-oriented, candid, and dependable” (Freberg et al., 2011, p.91). Clearly, through their qualities and intense community of following, SMIs are held to a high regard from their audiences. Most importantly to companies promoting their products and services SMIs “help potential customers make a buying decision by influencing [their] opinion, through social networking” (More & Lingam, 2017, p.1). This makes it vital for brands to work with influencers to promote their goods and services with the goal of having a positive impact on marketing and sales.

 

Business on Social Media:

Many companies, and their customers, see it as essential to have a presence on Social Networking Sites (SNS). In Kaske et al.’s (2012) studies, it was even found that companies that have a social media presence tend to have “higher customer retention, better customer communication, potential avoidance of outrage, sales increases, and greater reach” (p. 3904). Although not all businesses are based economically online, having a presence to engage with customers is shown to improve “customer retention, customer communication, and outrage avoidance” which becomes an asset termed ‘customer equity” (Kaske et. Al., 2012, p. 3901; p. 3903). Media saturation in today’s social networking systems, sites and platforms has lead to collaboration with SMIs to optimize their community of followers’ trust, commercializing the attention economy. SMIs now hold the loyal attention of a large number of people on social media so it is simple to understand the reasoning behind the drive to work with them. Thayne (2012) continues that

“in contemporary societies we are confronted with more information than can possibly be fully processed; therefore, attention economics emphasizes the significance of designing and developing methods to swiftly and effectively direct attention in order to deliver the right advertisements to the desired target market” (p.2).

This rethought process has been accessed by optimizing on the social capital of SMIs to market their products through avenues such as paid partnerships and collaborations. Within this essay this will be displayed using a local Australian SMI called Sarah’s Day who has recently been optimizing on her strong social capital.

Defining Social Capital:

Keely (2007) simply explains that social capital can be thought of as a common set of understandings and values within a community or society, allowing groups to develop levels of trust and provide an environment where they can work together if they are so inclined. Katz et al., (2004) states that “[strong] community ties are linked to intimacy, voluntary involvement, frequency of communication, feelings of companionship, knowing each other in multiple contexts, enduring ties, mutual ties, having one’s needs met, and shared social characteristics. Virtual communities and online environments deliver all of these” (p.337). Until the rise of the Internet and particularly SNS, societies were not able to form these intimate ties with such a large scale of individuals negating the boundaries or distant, race, time-zone’s and even language. This is because in because pre-Internet social capital had a stronger tie to spatial proximity (Katz et al., 2004). The mechanics to allow communication and the relationship formation outside of spatial proximity were tied to telephone and mail communication, which deterred the formation of strong ties, widespread asynchronous communication and community construction. SNS have allowed astronomical growth of social capital because connections are “based more on common ideas, interests, and occupations” rather than purely location (Katz, 2004, p.345). Koput (2010) believes that the expansion of social capital is rooted in repeated contact, which “must be ongoing, meaning that it is subject to occurring again at some time, although such a time can be indefinite” (p.3). SNS allows fluid and repeated access to promote communication with ease.

 

Discussing SMIs and Social Capital Optimization through Marketing:

It is clear that SMIs, through the power of the affordances of social media in a technological driven world, are able to gain an extreme amount of social capital online. SMIs have created virtual communities by promoting their personal brand and attracting like-minded people to follow them. Whether that community be based around fitness, fashion, beauty, sport, gaming, cooking or even mindfulness, SMI’s are tapping in on the variety of the Internet to extradite their niche group of followers. The success of SMIs and a method to measure their social capital is based “on factors such as number of daily hits on a blog, number of times a post is shared, or number of followers” (Freberg et al., 2011, p.90).

 

Figure 1: Sarahs Day Instagram account (Stevenson, May 2018c)

To expand on the methods utilized by SMIs and provide industry examples I will use a well-known Australian SMI called Sarah’s Day (@sarahs_day) and formally named Sarah Stevenson who is a New South Wales based Instagrammer, YouTuber and self-titled content creator. Originally Sarah started her YouTube channel in 2013 and has grown her “micro-celebrity” status to now having over four hundred thousand followers on Instagram and over six hundred thousand subscribers on YouTube (www.youtube.com/SarahsDay). Sarah engages frequently on accounts posting daily on Instagram, interacting multiple times a day on her Instagram stories and posting videos on YouTube channel every three days. She has been chosen as a case study due to her recent surge of working with other businesses for mutually benefiting profit through paid partnerships and collaborations.

Sarah is a vlogger, therefore someone who creates vlogs which Gao et al. (2010) claims is rooted from the amalgamation of the two separate words video and blog. It is obvious that video’s “can show a lot more than text, [therefore] vlogs provide a much more expressive medium for vloggers than text-blogs in which to communicate with the outer world” (Gao et al., 2010, p.2). Sarah Days’ niche in the building of the personal brand that she attracts is females who are interested in holistic health, fitness and cooking. She has built a community online from her followers around the world which she calls her #sezzysquad. Sarah’s Day clearly has created a strong social capital emphasized by Katz et al.’s (2004) belief that “[the] functions of virtual communities to foster communities of interest, information spread, and equality of status all work to enhance social capital, despite their lack of direct physical orientation” (p.325). It is Katz et. al’s (2004) belief that more recently, because of the common basis of ideas, occupations and interests, that ties and relationships have become more “organic.” Because Sarah’s community are people that follow her for her health and fitness advice alluding to the fact that their following is based in common interests, it is clear that Sarah has built a strong community with hundreds of thousands of followers.

 

 

In more recent months Sarah’s Day has proved Katz et al.’s (2004) thought that an increase of social capital online will transfer to a “rise in offline contact, civic engagement, and a sense of community, and the other traditional forms of social capital” (p. 325).  Although the financial aspect of companies alliance with this SMI haven’t been made public, Sarah’s Day has recently been working with White Fox Boutique, an online clothing store and iHerb.com an online health food store (Stevenson, 2018a; Stevenson, 2017; Stevenson, 2016). I will use Sarah’s Day affiliations with brands through collaborations and paid partnerships to understand the mutual financial benefit of optimizing the social capital of SMIs networks.

Paid Partnerships:

An article in the economist detailing the finances behind paid partnerships proves that companies are exploiting influencers’ social capital. It is now believed that “[hiring] such influencers allows companies to reach a vast network of potential customers” (“Celebrities’ endorsement,” 2016, para. 2). Paid partnerships or sponsored posts are a relatively new realm in the social media world however social networking sites are starting to form rules around this area to ensure that followers understand what is authentic and what is paid. Frier (2017) explains that in the past year “[influencers] are supposed to signal when they are being paid via hashtags on their posts that say #ad or #sponsored” (para. 4). In October 2016, Sarah’s day posted a video that she sneakily said was brought to subscribers by iHerb.com, meaning that she was paid to publish this vlog. Although it may have aligned with her content, she didn’t outwardly and clearly announced that it was a paid partnership because many influencer “simply fail to note the relationship at all out of concern they’ll appear inauthentic” (Frier, 2017, para. 4). As Hearn and Schoenhoff (2016) state, “[the] pursuit of “authentic” promotional connections with fans can include celebrities posting “candid” photos of “everyday life” in brand- name outfits on Instagram, or mentioning a product they have encountered on Twitter” (p.204). This example is shown by Sarah’s Day underwhelming emphasis to mention the paid partnership and over emphasis of stating that these are products she would usually buy however she wanted to make it more accessible to all of her fans by using an online store.

The perks of these partnerships can be astronomically and financially beneficial for the SMI involved. According to the Economist a SMI with between half a million to a million subscribers can be paid up to twenty-five thousand dollars for a sponsored YouTube video (“Celebrities’ endorsement,” 2016), that amount can even soar to three hundred thousand dollars per video on the basis of having over seven million subscribers. Although that amount may seem astronomical as Freberg et al. (2011) claims, SMIs “represent a new type of independent third party endorser who shape audience attitudes through blogs, tweets, and the use of other social media” (p.90). The trust built from the social capital of Sarah’s Days’ following has a positive impact on the iHerb.com by providing a positive review of their products and service shifting the desired eyes of the attention economy onto their business.

Figure 2: The Economist detailing differentiation of compensation for SMIs for each platform dependent on the size of their social capital through the number of followers they have (“Celebrities’ endorsement,” 2016)

 

According to the statistics of this particular video review, as of March 27th, 2018 Sarah’s recording had over one hundred and sixty thousand views, which lead to over two hundred shares and provided her with over two hundred and fifty subscriptions (Stevenson, 2016). The number of subscriptions and shares driven from this particular video proves that mutually beneficial relationship for both company and SMI.

Brand Collaborations:

SMIs’ CEO like qualities are helping them realize the benefits of being business savvy where they hold the power in a knowledge economy (Freberg et al., 2011; Crogan & Kingsley, 2012). Therefore, another form of alliance with companies is shown through official collaboration. This is when an SMI works with a brand to collectively create a product from that brand associated with the influencer SNS pseudonym. Recently there have been many examples of this however in the case of Sarah’s Day in recent months she has collaborated with White Fox Boutique, an online clothing shop. Sarah announced on February 27th, 2018 that she had spent half a year “designing and developing a 15 piece active wear collection [from scratch],” with the online clothing boutique (Stevenson, 2018a). The line gained so much attention from her followers that on the launch date the site crashed from overflowing traffic (Stevenson, 2018b).

Figure 3: Sarah’s announcement that her overwhelming loyalty from her social capital led to a website crash from overflowing traffic when her collaboration was released (Stevenson 2018)

 

It is fascinating that “simply by expressing themselves, individuals have become empowered participants in an emerging online reputation economy, where the reputation generated by social media participation functions as a new form of currency and, more generally, value” (Hearn & Schoenhoff, 2016, p.203). This has literally turned in financial currency for both influencers and the brands that they associate with. There is no denying from the information shown for SMIs combined with the traffic and attention gained through SMIs social capital that collaborations are mutually beneficial.

 

Conclusion:

This paper has discussed the economic benefits for SMIs and companies combined in a society that is noticing the rise of the “micro-celebrity” (Marwick, 2016). Influencers are becoming the new powerful ‘authentic’ voices online in a world that is saturated with advertising and commercialism. The desire to hold onto authenticity while self-sustaining through business relationship is the unwavering downfall of these relationships. SMIs are chasing to form a “perception of authenticity [to create] a space that is readily exploitable, insofar as SMIs can parlay the trust they inspire into myriad commercial arrangements” (Khamis et al., 2016, p.203). SMIs are trying to under emphasize the affiliations with brands through paid partnerships and move to more collaborations to hold steadfast strength in their social capital. Nevertheless, the combination of “influence maximization” and “social influence” have created a new wave of marketing online through social media (More & Lingam, 2017). It is undeniable that there is bilateral economic prosperity gained through the union of SMIs and brands with the strength of the community of social capital in SMIs networks.

 

 

References:

Celebrities’ endorsement earnings on social media. (2016). Retrieved March 17, 2018, from https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/10/daily-chart-9

Chen, H. (2017). College-Aged Young Consumers Perceptions of Social Media Marketing: The Story of Instagram, Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 39(1), 22-36. doi:10.1080/10641734.2017.1372321

Crogan, P., & Kinsley, S. (2012). Paying attention: Toward a critique of the attention economy. Culture Machine, 13, 1–29. Available: http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/issue/view/24

Dijkmans, C. Kerkhof, P. and Beukeboom, C. (2015). A stage to engage: Social media use and corporate reputation. Tourism Management 47. 58 – 67.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman2014.09.005

Freberg, K., Graham, K., Mcgaughey, K., & Freberg, L. A. (2011). Who are the social media influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 90-92. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.11.001

Frier, S. (2017, June 14). Instagram to Make It Clearer When Influencer Posts Are Paid Ads. Retrieved March 17, 2018, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-14/instagram-to-make-it-clearer-when-influencer-posts-are-paid-ads

Gao, W., Tian, Y., Huang, T., & Yang, Q. (2010). Vlogging. ACM Computing Surveys, 42(4), 1-57. doi:10.1145/1749603.1749606

Goldhaber, M.H. (1997). The Attention Economy and the Net. First Monday. 2 (4-7), April. Available: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/519/440

Hearn, A. and Schoenhoff, S., 2016. From celebrity to influencer: tracing the diffusion of celebrity value across the data stream. In: P. David Marshall and S. Redmond, eds. A companion to celebrity. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 194–212.

Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: where old and new media collide. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Kaske, F., Kugler, M., & Smolnik, S. (2012). Return on Investment in Social Media–Does the Hype Pay Off? Towards an Assessment of the Profitability of Social Media in Organizations. 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. doi:10.1109/hicss.2012.504

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.

Keeley, B. (2007). OECD insights human capital: how what you know shapes your life. Paris: OECD

Khamis, S., Ang, L., & Welling, R. (2016). Self-branding, ‘micro-celebrity’ and the rise of Social Media Influencers.Celebrity Studies, 8(2), 191-208. doi:10.1080/19392397.2016.1218292

Koput, K. W. (2010). Social capital : an introduction to managing networks. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Langlois, G., (2016) Social Networking and the Production of the Self. Meaning in the Age of Social Media, 26(4), 131-145. doi:10.1057/9781137356611.0008

Marwick, A. E. (2015). Instafame: Luxury Selfies in the Attention Economy. Public Culture, 27(1 75), 137–160. http://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-2798379 [Available via Reading List]

Marwick, A.E., (2016). You may know me from YouTube: (micro-) celebrity in social media. In: P.D. Marshall and S. Redmond, eds. A companion to celebrity. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 333–350.

More, J. S., & Lingam, C. (2017). A SI model for social media influencer maximization. Applied Computing and Informatics. doi:10.1016/j.aci.2017.11.001

Stevenson, S. [Sarah’s Day]. (2016, October). Healthy Snacks | Healthy Food That Taste Naughty [VEGAN]. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyRWbEbyZIw&t=318s

Stevenson, S. [@sarahs_day]. (2017, October 5). [Photograph of @loving_earth products]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/p/BZ3Fa5yHmik/?taken-by=sarahs_day

Stevenson, S. [@sarahs_day]. (2018a, February 22). [Photograph of Sarah’s day holding Tropeka Products]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/p/BffAYrdHicD/?taken-by=sarahs_day

Stevenson, S. [@sarahs_day]. (2018b, February 27). [Photograph of Sarah’s Day and White Fox Boutique Collaboration]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/p/BfrQMM3n-M2/?taken-by=sarahs_day

Stevenson, S. [@sarahs_day]. (2018c, May 5). [Photograph of Sarah’s Day Instagram Account]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/sarahs_day/

Thayne, M. (2012). Friends Like Mine: The Production of Socialised Subjectivity in the Attention Economy. Culture Machine, 13, 1-23. Retrieved October 31, 2017.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Communities Embracing and Adapting to the Web 2.0 through Facebook

Abstract

This paper investigates the adaptation of communities to the Web 2.0, and how it has become a major characteristic to the construction of online relationships, involving the social media site Facebook. Virtual communities are explored and linked to the current digital era and how social virtual communities are using the Facebook platform in everyday life to publish content, taking part in user connection through their activity. Beverungen, Böhm, and Land (2015, p. 479) believes that user connection focuses on the ‘audience’, now ‘users’, as online communities who publish content to Facebook for users to read and use. This content may be productive or unproductive, however, Facebook is one of the leading reasons for social relationships and virtual communities and the shift from physical to virtual. Virtual communities now have the ability to connect to users they may not know personally, resulting in new relationships and interlinked personal communities (Gruzd, Wellman & Takhteyev, 2011, p. 1). This paper analyses how online user activity on Facebook has been a factor that assisted the evolution and adaptation of offline communities to online communities.

Keywords: Facebook, communities, representations, connection, interaction, users, adaptation

 

The role of communities embracing and adapting to the Web 2.0 through Facebook

 

Since the release of the social networking site Facebook, users have been given the opportunity to generate and publish their own content to their profiles ‘free-of-charge’. This impressive site has now reached an incredibly high number of users, attaining 2.2 billion active users by 2017, with numbers still rising (Constine, 2017). Facebook is not the only form of interaction for virtual communities, with popular discussion websites such as Reddit (2005) and other Internet forums also forming virtual communities where users can interact. These sites have become the most popular way to communicate in the twenty-first century, providing various options including blog-type techniques, photos and videos. Not only do they allow users to publish content but they also provide them with websites where they can listen to music, read news and play. It has become a procedure for people to sustain connections to others, communicate themselves and construct new relationships. Similar to physical communities, this shift has allowed people to also become part of virtual communities, motivating users to the adaptation of communities on the Web 2.0. With the growing development of Facebook, it has significantly impacted lives by becoming a daily activity for entertainment and cultural purposes (Jin, 2015). The site has become an environment for self-expression and participation amongst various age groups. User activity has become a major factor in the process of communicating online through Facebook, allowing these online communities to share stories, opinions and anything that takes their interest. The social networking site has not only allowed people to communicate with users’ friends or family, but has enabled them to engage with other users that they may not know personally. This has not only expanded the number of users to communicate with, but has granted the ability to form online communities with people from all over the world. User connection is the transfer from physical connection and interaction into the online world of the Web 2.0, connecting a set of people and creating a sense of community (Gruzd et al., 2011). The adaptation of groups within the social networking site Facebook has formed a sense of community in this digital era, through users participating in online discussions and debates.

            The Welcoming of User Connection

User connection is similar to the traditional meaning of connecting and creating a community – A set of people with strong interaction and connection, creating a sense of unity (Gruzd et al., 2011). Communication on Facebook can be compared to being similar to offline interaction, as information is posted and stored on personal profiles, including relationships statuses, hobbies and even debatable topics which can all be discussed in offline communities. Facebook has assisted in the creation of communities that produce their own content. User activity was created as a defining process for users who create and publish their own work online, attracting other users to read and connect with the publisher or other readers. Not only does online activity give users’ a purpose for interaction, it also serves others with new social connections and assisting with maintaining existing relationships (Gruzd et al., 2011). With the transition from audiences to online users, there has become a mass broadcast of information to social networking sites such as Facebook (Thompson, 2008).

User connection focuses on connecting and responding to others, as well as keeping up to date with new information or news that can create conversation between users or communities, similar to that of a friend group. This is the reasoning behind the concepts ‘following’ and ‘adding’. This concept focuses on the users or information that is chosen to be accessed by the account holder, placed onto a ‘News Feed’ on social media sites such as Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. Zuckerberg stated that a ‘news feed’ is “a stream of everything that’s going on in their lives.” referring to content that is being posted in an up-to-date timeline (Thompson, 2008). This feature on Facebook enables user connection to occur, with people responding or commenting on posts that they feel are relatable. This engagement is a state of mind of users that are committed, passionate and dedicated to connecting online within virtual communities about various topics and situations (Porter, 2015). Emotions of users stimulate actions, which initiate participation in the community, such as the comment section on published content that allow users to debate and discuss specific topics relating to news, games, videos etc. This connection via different hobbies and interests on Facebook groups and pages has constructed a sense of community through virtual interaction.

            Sense of Community in the Digital Era

The Web 2.0 relies on online users to generate the content, creating an approach that can define the labour that is associated with the formation of Web 2.0 content (Jin, 2015). The creation of collaborative content is one of the main aspects of the Web 2.0, including multiple media posts on Facebook and the interaction between others online that it may initiate. Facebook has enabled users to connect and converse through text, photos and videos on their profiles, providing engagement and motivating interaction with other users within the community. The Internet has opened this new economic form where user-generated content has become part of the primary attributes. Facebook has assisted in the movement of communication from purely offline to online at any time of the day. Not only has it permitted users to create an online version of their identity, users’ can create pages and groups through their accounts depending on their interests. Any user is able to request to be part of the group of be invited, creating communities with various people from around the world. Multiple social media identities are quite common, however, Facebook makes it difficult to make multiple profiles as different email addresses and information are needed to create a new account. Instagram and Tumblr allow users to create numerous accounts, even by using the same log in details. These social media sites embrace the use of multiple accounts, with Instagram allowing a user to have up to 5 pages (Instagram, 2018). Social networking sites give users the ability to follow specific accounts on a certain account and make posts that are separate to their other profiles. Social media users can be a part of multiple communities depending on the account that they are logged in to, and can communicate from multiple profiles. Facebook has limited this access as a user can be added to multiple groups and pages at one time.

For example, users may take interest in other communities focusing on cooking, exercise, fashion or even religious communities, interacting with others who have similar interests. This sense of place drives the audience to feel as if they belong to a community, also giving them a reason to generate their online identity. Social communities are a location for users’ to receive support or socialize with others through user activity, resulting in communication, similar to what people would do in offline situations. These virtual communities perform in sensible arrangements for society, as they support amalgamation and belonging. New societal communities are developed as a united establishment that influences the value of responsibility and oversteps the power of politics and wealth, functioning as groups that have the power to influence. Users that are taking part in this influential establishment have various character and disposition, representing themselves through various personal interests within communities.

            Representations of the Internet User

Internet users that are involved in virtual communities are typically portrayed in ways that reflect their personal interests and the communities they are part of. It is common for users to represent a certain style of virtual identity, usually labeled within various categories. Users have embraced the opportunity that Facebook has given them, granting them the possibility to meet their individual goals of sharing their personal disclosures in a public forum (Aguiton & Cardon, 2007). A users status and influence can define a virtual community, as activity and influential entities inspire other community members (Porter, 2015). Internet users can represent themselves in different forms through social media networks, using this form of identity to attract other users through their posts and discussions online.

Facebook has enabled users to interact with others, although, this may only be a one-way action. Users are able to follow profiles, but this does not necessarily mean the account has to follow back (Gruzd et al., 2011). Due to this process, users behind public or personal pages have been able to form communities with millions of users who may follow their page just for their content without following back. These page creators or celebrities have the capability to communicate with millions of users online, and has assisted with the creation of smaller communities within the page that may result in a perception of a real community. There are a few different types of virtual community members, as users have a different approach to online engagement and the limits of their public discussions. One user may take the personal interest approach, using Facebook to search for information, buy and sell goods and promote their capabilities to gain a certain status and maximization of recognition (Aguiton & Cardon, 2007). Another type of user focuses on their belonging within the virtual community, stimulated by distributing knowledge, collective concern and volunteering, ensuring they take part in mutual activities (Aguiton & Cardon, 2007). As there is an array of different virtual communities, there are many representations of users on social media platforms such as Facebook. Virtual community members find value in communities that seek to construct relationships through interaction and helping others, and the gratification that results from these notions. Some members also join virtual communities for the enjoyment of control in participation, having access to data, and having a sense of belonging and bond to a community (Porter, 2015). Depending on how active, significant and consistent a user is their aims can be seen as adjustable and defined by their involvement. Self-identity of members is also another factor within virtual communities, as users aim to attain a responsive and comprehensive connection to please their experience within a Facebook community (Porter, 2015). This self-awareness has transferred from physical communities to the Web 2.0, allowing users to adapt to their portrayal of themselves online.

            Communities adapting to Web 2.0

Social communities are persistently changing, integrating and redefining groups that have transferred from physical communities. Cultural marginalisations and controlled progress have shifted from physical to digital communities, placing this change in a notable point in cultural conventions. Facebook contains social attributes that create expression by users through personal content, forming communities on in the virtual world. As Facebook now has millions of active users, it is difficult to determine limits and features of the social service and the spread of information through multiple communities that have formed within the network. Facebook is a clear guide to the relational virtual domain on the Web 2.0 that has been adapted by physical communities in their own environments. This digital exchange through virtual communities from ‘face-to-face’ interaction has become a voluntary progress and coordinative collaboration.

Social media platforms were the beginning of the transformation of communities, giving people a network where they can connect and engage with friends or family without having to speak to them in person. Mark Zuckerberg, a Harvard University student, created Facebook in 2004 to connect to his friends on campus (Thompson, 2008). The network has now become one of the biggest social media platforms for users to interact with one another, and create groups and communities through connection and collaboration. Facebook has integrated peoples businesses, hobbies and interests through its many features, providing users with various options to communicate and socialize. It has given business owners the opportunity to use this platform as a way to maintain and create relationships, as well as allow workers and companies to promote their brand and preserve an online existence (Beverungen et al., 2015). Thompson (2008) used an example of a student who created a group, which declared her love for Coldplay and her wish to participate in Greenpeace, sparking many other users to join the group with her. This group provided a sense of community within the users who had joined, granting them with an environment that takes their interest. These users may not know each other outside of the social media network, but it compares to a physical community discussing these interests in a real environment. Communities have begun adapting to the Web 2.0 and the features it provides in order to build a sense of community online.

Conclusions and Future Study

            With the growing confirmation of interaction on social media sites, communities have been able to expand and adapt to the virtual world on the Web 2.0. The shift has assisted in the construction of online relationships, resulting in virtual communities and their significance to online communication. Research into the success rates of virtual communities must take place in order to study how different Internet users are finding their virtual communities and how they compare to the physical.

Facebook has provided features to assist in the growth of virtual communities and users connecting through their strong interaction, creating a sense of unity within these groups of people. As virtual identities can represent multiple versions of a person, it has permitted people to engage with specific groups and pages that take their interest, comparable to the way physical communities interact. These social media websites have opened a virtual society where user-generated content has become a major attribute to social relationships through the Web 2.0. Communities have adapted to online engagement as features online have made the process effortless to find information that captures users and inspires them to take part in user connection.

 

  References

Aguiton, C., & Cardon, D. (2007). The Strength of Weak Cooperation: An Attempt to Understand the Meaning of Web 2.0. Communications & Strategies, 65(1), 51 – 65

Beverungen, A., Böhm, S., & Land, C. (2015). Free Labour, Social Media, Management: Challenging Marxist Organisation Studies. Organisation Studies, 36(4), 473-489

Constine, J. (2017, June 28). Facebook now has 2 billion monthly users… and responsibility. Tech Crunch. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/facebook-2-billion-users/

Gruzd, A., Wellman, B., & Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community. American Behavioural Scientist 55(10), 1294-1318. DOI: 10.1177/0002764211409378

Instagram. (2018). Add and Switch Between Multiple Accounts. Retrieved from https://help.instagram.com/1682672155283228

Jin, D. Y. (2015). Critical analysis of user commodities as free labour in social networking sites: A case study of Cyworld. Routledge, 29(6), 938-950 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2015.664115

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

Thompson, C. (2008). Brave New World of Digital Intimacy. The New York Times. 5 September. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07awarenesst.html?_r=1

 

Communities Adapting to the Web 2.0 Through Facebook (PDF)

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

Location’s Place in a Web 2.0 World

Featured image: Morrison, T. (2018, March 14). Incredible moment on social media — East coast schools are walking out, calling on Congress to act on gun violence. @Snapchat’s @SnapMap feature visualising this movement in the most amazing way… [Tweet]. Retrieved from:
https://twitter.com/THETonyMorrison/status/973937933353934849

Abstract

Spatial metaphors were initially drawn upon to help users navigate and understand a new online world with the conception of the Internet. This urbanisation of the digital space has continued to persevere throughout the rapid rise of Web 2.0, with the geotagging of online content, defined by Fendi et al., (2014) as “the process of adding geographical identification metadata”, becoming the new way in which users could integrate their understanding of location to visualise, classify and represent their experience online. Checking-in to a location on Facebook, pinning a location to a photograph posted on Instagram, applying a geofilter on Snapchat, etc. have now become normalised online behaviour to supplement content posted online. These various location-based affordances of Web 2.0 social networking platforms have helped to create this physical spatial substitute and in doing so, supporting the formation of group identities and practices of online communities. This paper specifically looks at Snap Map, Facebook Marketplace and augmented reality gaming app, Pokémon GO and how their integration of location have helped facilitate the way in which users experience a Web 2.0 online world, as well as the implications of sharing this information online.

Keywords

Online communities, Snapchat, Facebook, Pokémon GO, geotagging, location, participatory culture.

Introduction

The conception of the Internet introduced new uses of language and terminology to help users navigate and understand this new online world. One such way was to draw upon spatial metaphors in order to conceptualise their experience. Users navigated this cyberspace as web surfers of an information “superhighway”, creating traffic as they visited various “home” pages at web “addresses”. Aroya (2014) posits that these spatial metaphors became useful instruments to help foster a deeper understanding of this digital realm, with mapping seen as a convenient way in which to visualise, classify and represent this digital landscape. This urbanisation of the digital space has persevered throughout the rapid rise of Web 2.0, which allowed the user to take on a more active role in the production of online content. In particular, the geotagging of online content, defined by Fendi et al., (2014) as “the process of adding geographical identification metadata”, was utilised to integrate location online. As of 2016, data from the Pew Research Center has found that nine out of ten smartphone owners have now enabled location services on their personal devices, up from 74% in 2013 (Anderson, 2016). Once enabled, social networking applications are granted access to a user’s geographic location and able to use this data to generate a folksonomy of content. Upgrades to latest versions of social networking platforms have shifted towards placing more importance on geotagging to help facilitate the way in which social media users experience the online world. They have also helped to foster a sense of community within an interactive Web 2.0 world, by supplementing physical space on social networking platforms, allowing users to create more meaningful content by utilising these location-based features. This may include checking-in on Facebook, adding a location to a photograph on Instagram, or even using a geofilter on Snapchat. Geotagging and other location-based affordances of Web 2.0 social networking platforms create a physical spatial substitute, supporting the formation of group identities and practices of online communities.

This paper will initially look at the proliferation of Web 2.0 online communities, as well as the advent of the smartphone and integration of location-based services and how this has led to a shift in user behaviour towards location-based social networking. I then look at the examples of SnapMap on Snapchat, Facebook Marketplace and Pokémon GO, and how they have integrated geotagging and other location-based affordances to foster a sense of belonging and nurture interaction within these online communities.

Web 2.0 Online Communities

Similar in manner to Baudelaire’s concept of the flâneur (Baudelaire, 2010), user behaviour on the internet originated with individuals surfing various web pages to access and consume information in a sense as mostly a detached observer. This “cyberflâneur” as depicted by Goldate (1998) was initially theorised as a figure who was able to browse various online offerings without the need to contribute or interact. However, Web 2.0 was born out of a need for users to have increasingly autonomous and dynamic online experiences, and with this, a prevalence of communities began to surface and proliferate. Just as Benedict Anderson (1983) in Imagined Communities argued that print capitalism and an increase in access to resources written in the vernacular allowed imagined communities to form and feel a sense of belonging, so too were the formation of online communities on various Web 2.0 social networking platforms. The convergence of technology and asynchronous platforms that facilitate communication have allowed users a more interactive and meaningful online experience. They are now able to easily share content and broadcast their interests/ideas/musings, subsequently interacting and facilitating discussion with like-minded individuals.

Significantly, Aguiton and Cardon (2007) determined that individuals built their self-identity through the ‘continuous search for recognition in the eyes of others,’ and online communities (in place of Anderson’s imagined communities) were the platforms with which to facilitate this emergence of common discourses. Constant upgrades are made to social networking platforms, moving towards a more seamless integration of the online and offline world, with developments often reflective of user behaviour and trends. One such upgrade has been the shift towards incorporating location-based affordances that nurture interaction within online communities.

The Advent of the Smartphone & Location-Based Social Networking

The proliferation of personal devices, particularly the advent of the smartphone, was the catalyst towards a new form of location-based social networking. In early 2013, Facebook made an adjustment to its Application Programming Interface (API), which provided users with the option to enable location-sharing across third party applications (Wilken, 2014). This simplified the way users were able to include their location into a social media update or interaction, and soon, this became the norm in their online behaviour. Another Facebook upgrade in the early 2010s was the ability to incorporate hashtags, or personal tagging, which too became normalised social media behaviour and allowed users to tag, and thus categorise, their content. Users were also able to incorporate geotagging, which Kapko (2014) argues was a way to make mundane longitudes and latitudes meaningful when placed in context with various social media interactions. This convergence of location-based sharing and content tagging normalised user behaviour of creating content that incorporated location as a representation of physical space.

Online communities were also better able to integrate this location-based behaviour in their interactions with others. When users are geographically distanced, the real-time sharing of user location allows online communities to strengthen their sense of rapport as individuals are unified through their provision of their location. The online representation of their physical place in the offline world is a pivotal and personal component of user identity that other members of the community may identify with through their understanding of that physical place. Gruzd (2011) endorses this, in that users need to imagine that they – or others – belong to a community, and this includes the provision of that physical spatial substitute, through the sharing of their location. As with Anderson’s imagined communities, so too can online communities utilising social networking platforms forge a sense of belonging through their commonalities.

The Importance of Location on Snapchat

A social networking platform that is heavily reliant on integrating this location-based online behaviour is Snapchat. Launched in 2011, the social networking platform is comparatively different to alternative social networking platforms. Social networking sites (SNS) have been typically defined by Elison and Boyd (2007) as web-based services that allow individuals to create a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system. Snapchat differs in that it is a smartphone-based application where users are able to share content (privately, or publicly via their stories) in place of a profile, and is only accessible to viewers for a limited time period. Users are unable to leave a long-term record of the content they have generated or a digital footprint, characteristic of other SNS’. Additionally, Kapko (2016) has found that Snapchat elevates the importance of location-based social networking and places it at the forefront of the user experience on the platform. The locations where interactions take place increasingly become an integral part of the social media dialogue (Bernabo-Moreno et al., 2018). This is particularly pertinent for Snapchat, where content is shared sporadically and spontaneously, therefore the inclusion of location supplements that content. Bernabo-Moreno et al. (2018) also believe that geotagging used in this context places further significance and emotional impact on an event, based on the social media user-generated content attached to a location.

Furthermore, an upgrade to Snapchat in 2017 introduced Snap Map, a new feature which allowed users to share their location (and subsequent content) in real-time on a world map available for those that had this feature enabled to view, intending to assist users and facilitate engagement in the offline world. On March 14 2018, Snap Map went viral due to the merging of its functionality with online community engagement when the map was used as a way for high school students to protest school shootings, uniting as a community through the provision of their location online. By marking their place on the Snap Map, they were displaying their stance on opposing gun violence (See Figure 1 and Figure 2). The location-based geotagging as an online representation of their physical location on Snapchat thus provided this online community with a way to form a strong sense of unity and belonging.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Online Communities & Facebook Marketplace

The introduction of the Facebook Marketplace is another example of a Web 2.0 platform that has utilised location-based social networking as a way to facilitate local community engagement. Introduced in 2016, the feature is a hub for users to sell, trade and barter in the same sense as they would in a traditional marketplace in the offline world. Anyone with a Facebook account is able to list various items online, similar in a sense to classified advertisements, and these are listed for other users based on their proximity to the seller. If a user has shared their location and is within close proximity to the seller, their item is likely to be listed higher and individuals can then facilitate a conversation to discuss the transaction further, or exchange an item for a fee. This type of private trading initially began within various Facebook groups, with local communities who were already connected with one another able to facilitate these forms of exchanges (Ku, 2016). By incorporating the figurative traditional marketplace with Facebook’s location-based functionality, this feature may also be interpreted as an extension of offline local communities, as represented online. As with the Snap Map feature on Snapchat, it may also be regarded as first and foremost a proponent that helps to leverage the facilitation of real-time engagement. Kellerman (2016) argues that the only communication medium that rivals the ‘topological flexibility of computer networks’ is place itself, placing precedence on interaction within the real world. Yet these forms of socio-spatial online formations allow verified users to safely interact with others online, before facilitating offline engagement, and continue to strengthen their sense of community. Therefore, it remains pivotal for such developments and upgrades to social networking platforms to continue to prioritise the offline world.

Pokémon GO & the Implications of Location Sharing

Despite the benefits location-based social networking platforms have provided for the formation and sense of belonging within online communities, it is important to consider the implications that may occur as a result of sharing this personal information. There have been privacy concerns raised due to users openly sharing their location and the normality that has been placed on this form of interaction. One such example of this is when the augmented reality game Pokémon GO, was launched in 2016. Pokémon GO incorporates geospatial mapping as part of the gameplay and relies heavily on players sharing their location to progress in the game and proceed throughout the different stages. Players of the game were able to participate in Community Days, where they were able to meet with other players within their local community, as determined by their location-enabled devices, to play a ‘bonus game,’ and for a limited time period, partake in an entirely new experience of the game. The rapid success of the game meant that multitudes of players were knowingly trespassing into private property and causing nuisance in order to progress in the game, with disregard for those that owned or maintained the property (Shum, 2017). As Arora (2014) argues, users exercise cognitive mapping strategies to navigate their virtual environment in the same manner in which they approach real spaces. Although these location-based affordances allow users to integrate the offline and online world, they are not a form of permission to trespass or interfere with private property, just as sharing location on another social networking platform does not provide permission for users to trespass into that offline location. It is this boundary between the two worlds that needs to be closely examined even more so as our personal devices continually upgrade to include new functionality that integrates our location in the offline world with our interactions and behaviours online.

Conclusion

As Web 2.0 social networking platforms continue to develop, we will continually witness advancements in the integration of location-based functionality. As Arora (2017) argues, space has become even more important in reconfiguring and expanding our notions of social practice, both online and offline. No longer will the cyberflâneur web surfer simply be riding the online virtual waves, but will instead be actively seeking out dynamic and interactive rich-content in their experience and interaction online. As geotagging and location-based affordances continue to take their pivotal place in the Web 2.0 online experience, meaningful location functionality should be considered so as to help foster the sense of belonging that takes place within online communities. Users must also remain conscious of their behaviour online as they share their current location using their personal devices and consider the implications doing so may have in terms of privacy and data-sharing. Arora (2014) deems the digital realm as intimate, yet distant. The physical spatial substitute that location-based services provide will continue to allow users to feel a sense of belonging and support the formation of group identities. It will also allow them to continue to have meaningful interactions within their online communities. Web 2.0 will continue to prioritise the autonomous online experience of users and thus feel they are able to share content, including the provision of location via these location-based services. Future imaginings of how this will continue to shift are endless, particularly as technology moves towards the proliferation of wearable devices, as well as facial and fingerprint recognition on our smartphones. Location continues to have an important part in the way we experience the ever-changing technological landscape; as Wilken (2014) surmises, ‘life happens in real time and so should sharing’.

References

Aguiton, C., & Cardon, D. (2007). The Strength of Weak Cooperation: An Attempt to Understand the Meaning of Web 2.0. Communications & Strategies, 65(1).  Retrieved from:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1009070 

Alter, C. (2018, March 14). Student walkouts are basically the only events showing up on Snapchat Map right now #nationalschoolwalkoutday [Tweet]. Retrieved from:
https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/973974952994013184 

Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities. Reflection on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.

Anderson, M. (2016, January 29). More Americans using smartphones for getting directions, streaming TV. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/29/us-smartphone-use/

Arora, P. (2014). Metaphor as Method: Conceptualizing the Internet through Spatial Metaphors. In The Leisure Commons, A Spatial History of Web 2.0. London: Routledge. (pp. 33-51). Retrieved from:
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/reader.action?docID=1721046&ppg=33&query= 

Baudelaire, C. (2010). The Painter of Modern Life. London: Penguin Books.

Bernabé-Moreno, J, Tejeda-Lorente, A. Porcel, C. Fujita, H. Herrera-Viedma, E. (2018). Quantifying the emotional impact of events on locations with social media. Knowledge-Based Systems, 146, 44-57.
https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.01.029 

Elison, N.B and Boyd, D. (2013). Sociality through Social Network Sites. In W.H Dutton (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 151-172). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fendi, K., Adam, S., Kokkas, N. and Smith, M. (2014). An Approach to Produce a GIS Database for Road Surface Monitoring. APCBEE Procedia, 9, 235-240.

Goldate, S. (1998, May 19). The Cyberflâneur – Space and Places on the Internet. Ceramics Today. Retrieved from:
http://www.ceramicstoday.com/articles/051998.htm 

Gruzd, A. Wellman, B. and Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(10), 1294 – 1318. Retrieved from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002764211409378 

Kapko, M. (2016, April 28). How Snapchat paves the way for future of location marketing. CIO. Retrieved from: https://www.cio.com/article/3062600/marketing/how-snapchat-paves-the-way-for-future-of-location-marketing.html   

Kellerman, A. (2016). The Internet as Space. In Geographic Interpretations of the Internet (pp. 21-33). Retrieved from:
https://link-springer-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-33804-0   

Ku, M. (2016, October 3). Introducing Marketplace: Buy and Sell With Your Local Community. Facebook Newsroom. Retrieved from:
https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/10/introducing-marketplace-buy-and-sell-with-your-local-community/ 

Morrison, T. (2018, March 14). Incredible moment on social media — East coast schools are walking out, calling on Congress to act on gun violence. @Snapchat’s @SnapMap feature visualising this movement in the most amazing way… [Tweet]. Retrieved from:
https://twitter.com/THETonyMorrison/status/973937933353934849 

Shum, A., Tranter, K. (2017). Seeing, Moving, Catching, Accumulating: Pokémon GO and the Legal Subject. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. 30(3), 477-493. Retrieved from:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11196-017-9519-8
 

Wilken, R. (2014). Places nearby: Facebook as a location-based social media platform. New Media & Society. 16(7), 1087-1103. Retrieved from:
http://journals.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444814543997 


Download Conference Paper as PDF

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

Did you hear? Word-of-mouth advertising is more effective than traditional advertising

Did you hear? Word-of-mouth advertising is more effective than traditional advertising

Shannon Wells

Curtin University

Abstract

This conference paper explores the relationship between social media influencers and their followers, and how they become a community. It explores how followers are more prone to trust a social media influencers opinion on products or places because of their weak tie. This results in companies using this to their advantage by sending their products to social media influencers for them to post a review to their followers. This is called word-of-mouth advertising and companies do this because it is a cheaper way of getting their products across, and it has a more instant effect. Word-of-mouth advertising is becoming more popular than traditional advertising. Though there are still reasons as to why traditional advertising is still needed and this is due to the companies target audience, and people not having complete access to the internet. This paper uses Emily Davies, a social media influencer from Perth, as an example as to how communities can be online and offline, and how she communicates to her followers. It also uses Davies as an example on how companies use social media influencers to advertise their brands.

key words: Community, Social media influencer, Word-of-mouth advertising, weak ties.

 

Did you hear? Word-of-mouth advertising is more effective than traditional advertising

Introduction

The rise of technology and the Internet has provided a lot of opportunities for companies to advertise their products to a large amount of people (Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009, pp. 90). It has also opened up a lot of avenues for people to communicate with others who have the same interests that they do, and this helps form communities (Rice et al, 2004, pp. 4). People can do this on a variety of different social network platforms, some of these being Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and blogging sites. They are able to access these sites through a range of different technologies, primarily being mobile phones and laptops. Users on these websites can post a range of different things to their friends and followers instantly. Some people choose to use these social media platforms to post their opinions on places they’ve been to, products they’ve tried or brands they’ve bought, and have gained a large number of followers by doing so. This results in these users becoming social media influencers. Companies recognise the influence these users have on their followers and choose to take advantage of this by sending them their products to promote online (Uzunoglu & Misci Kip, 2014, pp. 592.). This is called word-of-mouth advertising and it is becoming more effective than traditional advertising as it reaches people faster, and it has a lower cost (Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009, pp. 90). Social network sites help people with similar interest’s form communities online and social media influences help bring these people together, which creates a following. The followers trust the social media influencers opinion and companies take advantage of this by getting them to participate in word-of-mouth advertising, as they know it will reach a large amount of people.

Discussion

Social media influencers are able to form communities through social networks which offer online and offline social ties. Social media influencers are users on social media websites who share their interests to a large number of followers (Freberg et al, 2011, pp. 90). Social media influencers update their social media profiles regularly to inform their followers on what they are doing, what products they’re using, what brands they’re wearing, and what places they like to go to. A community is formed by doing this, the term community branches out from not only solidarity groups of close friends and neighbours, but also social networks of people who don’t live close by (Wellman & Gulia, 1997, pp. 2). Social networks communities are created through social interactions, common interests and experiences, and through a variety of different social networks (Rice et al, 2004, pp. 4). Their followers will see their posts on the places they’ve been to and the products they like, and this usually results in them going out and experiencing or buying the same products. This is where the social media influencer name comes from as followers are being influenced to do buy or do these things. This creates a weak tie between the influencers and the followers. A weak tie is when users choose to follow and trust another person’s opinion even though they might’ve never met or don’t really know each other (Wellman & Gulia, 1997, pp. 8). Though many communities online do connect offline as well, whilst still being able to keep the weak tie in place (Wellman & Gulia, 1997, pp. 13). Communities do this by meeting up with each other to enjoy their specific interests together, for example if the interest was a certain breed of dog, they would all come together in the park to walk their dogs. This keeps the weak tie relationship as they’re only gathering together for one common thing. Users are more likely to trust the opinion of someone they have a weak tie with, then those they have a strong tie with, which is their close circle of friends or family (Wellman & Gulia, 1997, pp. 13). This is because it is exposing them to different opinions and point of views then those that are close to them, who may always have the same ones. This is why users are more attracted to a social media influencers opinion as it is different to the opinions of those in their close circle (Wellman & Gulia, 1997, pp. 13).

An example of a social media influencer who demonstrates a community network is Emily Davies who uses Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube to communicate with her followers. Davies is a fashion blogger who lives in Perth and has 143,000 followers on Instagram (Davies, 2018). Davies offers a weak tie with her followers as she shares with them her opinions on products, places and brands. Davies primarily uses Instagram to post photos of her favourite outfits to show her followers, and to promote the brands she’s wearing (Davies, 2018). Davies uses the Snapchat application on Instagram to inform her followers when she has a new post up, and to also show her viewers all the new clothes she has been sent (Davies, 2018). Davies has also just released her first vlog on YouTube which shows her followers the process she goes through when getting ready for a festival (Davies, 2018). Davies social networks also offers an offline relationship as well as an online one. The social media influencer recently just had her own pop up store at the Little Market Place in Perth where her followers from Perth could come meet her, and buy some of the clothes brands she always promotes. This shows how a weak tie can also be offline, as all her followers came together for one specific interest, and that was her clothes and sense of fashion. Davies also mentions at the end of her vlog that she loves meeting her followers, and that whenever they see her at a festival to come have a chat with her (Davies, 2018). This shows the followers how much she loves and cares for them and will result in her followers always supporting her and maintaining the weak tie.

Companies use social media influencers to promote their brands and they do this through word-of-mouth advertising. Word-of-mouth advertising is when businesses choose specific social media influencers who align with their brand, to promote their products as they know it will reach a large amount of like-minded people (Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009, pp. 90). Marketers are turning more towards word-of-mouth advertising as it is proving more effective than traditional advertising (Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009, pp. 90). This is because the cost is lower, and the message can be received faster as a post on a social media website can be uploaded instantly (Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009, pp. 90). Companies will send their products to social media influencers for free, and the social media influencer will post their views, preferences, or experiences on the product to their followers (Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009, pp. 90).  Social media influencers do this by uploading photos, videos, or written posts on their chosen social media platform. These posts contain a tag to the company’s page, or a link to the specific product to make it easier for the followers to buy if they choose to. Companies know that followers will be influenced by these particular posts and will be more likely to buy it because they trust the social media influencers opinion (Uzunoglu & Misci Kip, 2014, pp. 592.). Word-of-mouth advertising is also more attractive because it offers a way to advertise their products in a different and not so obvious way, this is effective because followers don’t feel like the posts are direct advertisements from the company. Companies can do this by holding a competition with a social media influencer, or by even sponsoring their outfit for a day out as they know it will get a lot of attention.

Emily Davies uses Instagram and Snapchat to promote specific beauty and fashions brands. Davies does this by always tagging the clothes brand she is wearing in her Instagram posts, and by presenting the photo in an attractive way to show followers her specific style (Davies, 2018). Davies also uses Instagram’s snapchat application to post photos of the clothes she has been sent fresh out of the package, and always tags the brands that send them to her (Davies, 2018). Davies also uses Instagram’s snapchat application to talk to her followers in a series of Snapchat videos about her thoughts on some of the products she uses and her recommendations (Davies, 2018). The brands she promotes then reuse her photos by either posting it or sharing it to their profile, for their followers to see so it reaches a larger amount of people. Davies will also participate in competitions with specific brands, Davies will post a photo which informs her followers on what they will win and will caption it with what they need do to win it. This usually includes having to follow her, follow the brand and tagging a friend in the comments which are all things that will help the post reach more people. Davies is also being sponsored by a clothing brand who is paying for her trip to Coachella where she will wear the brands clothing for the festival, this will prove to followers her support for that specific brand.

Counter-argument

Traditional advertisements are still an effective way to advertise in society today. This is because not everyone has access to the Internet or have social media accounts where social media influencers could have an impact on them (Tater, 2016). Therefore, their source of advertisements would come from print, television or radio (Tater, 2016). Also depending on what the target audience is, depends on which type of advertising the company chooses to use (Tater, 2016). If the company is going for an older demographic, they would use traditional advertising methods as they know that would be more effective (Tater, 2016). Whereas if the company is advertising to a younger demographic they would use word-of-mouth advertising, as it is more likely they would see or be affected by advertisements on their social media websites (Tater, 2016).

Conclusion

Social media influencers have become the new advertisers for companies. Social media influencers have many followers on their social network sites, and these followers have come to care and trust what they say. This forms a weak tie between the influencer and the follower, which can be online and offline in some cases. Industries recognise the power social media influencers have over their followers and have chosen to use this to their advantage. They do this by sending their products to social media influencers who then write a post or upload a photo or video giving their opinion on the product. This forms a community as there is a whole group of people who are being influenced because they all have the same interests, and want to be using the same products or going to the same places. Emily Davies is a good example of how a community can be formed through common interests, as she has over 140,000 followers on Instagram. These followers participate in an online and offline relationship as Davies communicates with them regularly online, but also offers chances for them to meet her offline. Davies is also a good example of how brands use social media influencers to promote their products. Davies does this by wearing their clothing, uploading a stylistic photo and then tagging the brands so her followers can see and be inspired. The rise of technology and the obsession of social network sites has resulted in word-of-mouth advertising being more effective as users create weak ties with social media influencers who promote a wide range of products and places.

Reference list

Davies, E. (2018, March 19). EM DAVIES GRWM Festival Edition // FIRST EVER VLOG?! // Hidden. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/z2nKAK55vR8

emdavies__. (2018). Emily Davies (Instagram page). Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/emdavies___/

Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. (2011). Who are the social media influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 90-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.11.001

Goehring, R. (2016). 3 Tips to Encourage Word of Mouth Advertising today. Retrieved from https://rewardstream.com/blog/3-tips-encourage-word-mouth-marketing-today/ 

Rice, R., Katz, J., Acord, S., Dasgupta, K. & David, K. (2004). Personal Mediated Communication and the Concept of Community in Theory and Practice. Annals of the International Communication Association, 28(1), 315-371. DOI: 10.1080/23808985.2004.11679039

Tater, M. (2016). Why Traditional Marketing is Still Effective. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneurshiplife.com/traditional-marketing-effective/

Trusov, M., Bucklin, R., & Pauwels, K. (2009). Effects of Word-of-Mouth versus Traditional Marketing: Findings from an Internet Social Networking Site. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 90-102. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20619048

Uzunoğlu, E., & Misci Kip, S. (2014). Brand communication through digital influencers: Leveraging blogger engagement. International Journal Of Information Management, 34(5), 592-602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.04.007

Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Net Surfers Don’t Ride Alone: Virtual Communities as Communities. In P. Kollock, & M. Smith (Eds.), Communities and Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.

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

What impact do Instagram influencers have on the community?

 

The effect of social capital on Instagram

 influencers audiences

Nicola Roque

Curtin University

 

Abstract

This paper will discuss the strong ties that are formed in the involved communities of social media influencers, using the social media platform Instagram as an example. One Instagram influencer who has a large Instagram following is Tammy Hembrow; she involves and engages with different social groups in her audience. This range of demographics involved in Tammy’s audience has created social capital held by Tammy over many different kinds of people. With the use of this influencer as an example, this paper discusses the ties formed between the influencer and the audience, the ties formed between the audience members and other audience members and the balance between financial gain and creating strong ties within the community.

Keywords: Weak ties, Strong ties, Instagram Influencers, Social Capital.

 

The effect of social capital on Instagram

 influencers audiences

The social capital held by social media influencer’s significantly impacts on the ties formed in involved communities. Many people use social media to connect with communities, create networks and create social ties with people with similar interests. Networks within this social media context refer to these connections that are made between people with similar interests. Strong and weak ties can be created with members of these networks, and often these ties can be influenced by people who hold social capital. One platform that has many social media influencers who hold social capital is the social media site Instagram. “The top 50 Instagram influencers total 3.1 billion followers.” (Influencer Marketing Hub, 2018). These large amounts of followers often are interested in the niche markets that are presented by the Instagram influencers such as fitness, health and beauty, gaming, lifestyle, motherhood or sports and many other topics. The connection of interests held between the followers of each influencer community can create social ties. In this paper, I will argue that the social capital held by social media influencer’s significantly impacts on the ties formed in involved communities. I will be backing up this argument by looking into three main points that show the impact of this social capital on involved people. Firstly I will be discussing the relationships formed between the influencer and the audience, being strong ties with regard to the influence that these influencers have over their audience. Secondly I will discuss the relationship formed between the audience and other audience members as being strong ties due to the connection of similar interests between audience members. Thirdly I will be discussing the balance between product promotion/ financial gain and creating strong ties in the involved community. I will be discussing these points with reference to the Instagram influencer Tammy Hembrow; an Australian based fitness, health and beauty influencer and Mother.

Social capital

Social Capital refers to “The ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in social networks.” (Portes, 1998; Mu, J., Peng, G., & Love, e. 2008). Ties formed in communities refer to the weak and strong relationships formed in communities online and offline. These ties can be between social media influencers and their audience and/or between the audience members themselves. Social ties in this context can refer to a strong friendship- like relationship or to the ability of a social media influencer to influence an audience member due to the respect held by an audience member for that influencer, even though these two parties may have never engaged in conversation before.  Macpherson et al (2006) argues that “Using communication technology may weaken social ties, increasing the prevalence of social isolation throughout society.” (McPherson et al, 2006; Boase, J. 2008). This communication technology referring to any technology being used to communicate with others, such as smartphones. In the context of this argument communication technology could be further defined as social media tools that are used by people to communicate.

The argument of McPherson et al. on the weakening of social ties is relevant to this argument as social ties may have been weakened within influencers and their audience’s due to the lack of actual conversation between the influencer and each audience member. However strong ties may also be created due to the use of social media communication technologies, between influencers and their audiences and between the audience members. The majority of studies however suggest that people utilise different kinds of social media communication technologies in order to fit their lifestyles and social needs. (Boase, J. 2008). The majority of people use social media to connect with others and grow their communities, in turn decreasing the amount of social isolation within society. (McPherson et al, 2006; Boase, J. 2008).

 

Relationships between the influencer and audience

Tammy Hembrow is an Instagram influencer who has created a community involving different social groups and members; mothers, fashion and beauty lovers and fitness lovers. Tammy Hembrow’s different range of interests and talents allows for a large audience of different demographics. Tammy has over 8 million Instagram followers, with an average of 5 thousand followers per day. (Social Blade, 2018). Instagram influencers such as Tammy Hembrow that reach a large audience, often feel a range of benefits from their jobs such as receiving money, free products and potentially being able to make influencing their main occupation. “Networking is the ostensible purpose of these sites – using one’s chain of connections to make new friends, dates, business partners, etc.”  (Donath, J., & Boyd, D. 2004). Networking for an influencer like Tammy, means making money and is absolutely imperative to making her brand flourish. Growing these communities is essential to influencers, using the chain of connections to find new followers with similar interests. Tammy creates and keeps these connections strong with her audience members by replying to comments made by audience members and by speaking on her Instagram story, answering questions for her audience. She also has other active social media accounts such as Twitter, Snapchat and Youtube. Using these different platforms allows her audience members who have found her images on Instagram and want to find more information on the topics that she covers (i.e: motherhood, fashion, fitness etc) to follow links to each of her social media accounts and find what they are looking for. By using this chain of social media communication technology platforms Tammy has created a larger audience for herself, reaching different types of audience members on each platform. This has created multiple social ties between herself and each of her audience members.

The social capital held by influencers like Tammy creates strong ties with their audience members due to the ability that they have to influence audience members. This includes the ability to influence audience members to purchase promoted products, to try activities promoted by the influencers and to follow other brands or influencers that are connected to the influencer. Social network influencers are seen as “A trusted tastemaker in one or several niches.” (Veirman, D, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. 2017). These influencers are seen as trusted due to the high number of followers that they obtain, making audience members feel that if other people of similar demographic to themselves, trust, respect and follow the information that these influencers put forward, that it is suitable for them to do so too. This social capital held by these influencers therefore impacts on the social ties created by the influencer and their audience members by allowing Instagram influencers to have some power and influencer over their audience, which shows a strong tie between these audience members and the influencer.

 

Relationship between audience and other audience members

“Underlying all the networking sites are a core set of assumptions: that there is a need for people to make more connections, that using a network of existing connections is the best way to do so, and that making this easy to do is a great benefit.” (Donath, J., & Boyd, D. 2004). Finding new connections is easier when a preconceived group of individuals with similar interests has already been created. Audience members know where to go to find people to make connections with. Social media sites allow users to meet strangers, but they also “Enable users to articulate and make visible their social networks. This can result in connections between individuals that would not otherwise be made. (Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. 2007). Often social media influencers allow for connections to be made within audience members that usually would not connect, potentially due to differing geographic location or differing demographics. Using Tammy Hembrow’s following as an example, many traditional followers of beauty and fashion bloggers on Instagram are young women around the ages 13-25, however the fact that Tammy is a young mother brings in a new set of audience members; mothers. This range of followers allows for audience members who may not have connected before to connect online.

Counter argument

Danah M. Boyd and Nicole B. Ellison argue that although social network sites do allow strangers to meet online, the main reason for people using social media sites is in order to articulate their pre-existing social networking connections, this could be relationships that have been formed on other social networking sites previously or offline. Boyd & Ellison argue that these meetings between people over social media are often due to “latent ties”, that are existent between people that have met offline before. (Boyd, M. D., & Ellison, B. N. 2007). This counter argument is relevant in that often people on some social media sites have met offline, however in the context of the social media site Instagram, people post images that capture their brand image or something that they want to present about themselves, creating an identity for themselves online. This encapsulate the idea behind the platform, putting forward an identity you want to be received by others, through the use of images and videos. Due to this being the main purpose of Instagram, it makes sense that people who do not know each other offline would meet online and follow each other, perhaps for inspiration or because they share similar interests. This creates strong ties between audience members of influencers as they have never met before but still come together due to similar interests.

 

Balance between product promotion/ financial gain and creating strong ties in the community

Many Instagram influencers are paid by companies to promote products due to their large range of audience members. “Instagram influencers receive payments ranging from free products to $1 million per post.” (Influencer Marketing Hub, 2018). They are paid by these company’s due to the influence that they have over their audience. This means “These endorsements are likely to be interpreted as highly credible electronic word of mouth (eWOM) rather than paid advertising as they are often seamlessly woven into the daily narratives influencers post on their Instagram accounts”. (Abidin. 2016; Veirman, D, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. 2017). Influencers audiences feel as though they relate to the influencers they follow, to them the influencer is almost a friend or guide to finding the best clothes, makeup, fitness techniques etc. It is easy for an influencer to incorporate a paid advertisement into their feed without it seeming like they are just trying to manipulate their audience into purchasing products because they are trusted as being an expert in a niche market. “People will ignore ads, but they won’t ignore posts, mentions and blogs by influencers who they have willingly followed and routinely engage with. (Ghidotti, N. 2017).

The impact of a social media influencer not finding the balance between keeping and creating meaningful connections with people in their involved communities and product promotion/ financial gain can lead to a loss of trust between influencers and their audiences. “Celebrity endorsements, however, tend to be expensive and are sometimes viewed as untrustworthy because the stars are motivated by money and not by sharing honest opinions and experiences”. (Morgan, N. 2017). When audience members lose trust in their Instagram influencer it leads to the job of the influencer; to influence their audience into buying products that they enjoy themselves, being very hard to do. Audience members lose trust and don’t believe that the influencer is promoting a product or brand because they truly enjoy it and are only promoting it for financial gain. This can occur due to the size of the influencers audience; the larger their audience the more famous the influencer is, which can make the audience feel as though the influencer is less relatable. This can also occur because the influencer is promoting something seemingly very different to what they usually promote or doesn’t seem to align with the influencers beliefs, likes or interests in the audience’s mind.

This balance between product promotion/ financial gain, which is necessary to find due to the social capital held by the influencer, impacts on the ties formed between the influencer and the audience by potentially weakening social ties if balance is not found.

Conclusion

From the research supplied it can be said that for the most part the social capital held by social media influencers, impacts significantly on the social ties held by involved communities by creating strong ties between; the influencer and their audience and the audience members and other audience members. If a balance is found between product promotion/ financial gain and retaining a trustworthy, respectful relationship with audience members then social ties are strengthened between the influencer and the audience. By using a famous Instagram influencer such as Tammy Hembrow for reference it is evident that this argument is relevant.

 

References

Mu, J., Peng, G., & Love, E. (2008). Interfirm networks, social capital, and knowledge flow. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12, 86-100.

https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270810884273

 

Boase, J. (2008). Personal networks and the personal communication system. Information, Communication & Society, 11.

https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1080/13691180801999001

 

Influencer Marketing hub. (2018). 15 Mind Blowing Instagram Statistics You Don’t Know. Retrieved from: https://influencermarketinghub.com/15-instagram-influencer-statistics/

 

Social blade. (2018). Instagram Statistics Summary for Tammy Hembrow. Retrieved from:

https://socialblade.com/instagram/user/tammy%20hembrow

 

Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public Displays of Connection. BT Technology Journal, 22 (4), 71-82.

http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/Donath/socialnetdisplay.draft.pdf

 

Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. (2007). Social Network Sites: definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13 (1).

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x

 

 

Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through Instagram influencers: the impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of Advertising, The Review of Marketing Communications. 36(5), 798-828.

https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035

 

Ghidotti, N. (2017, March 1). Snapchat, Instagram and Influencers, How to Know What’s Best for Your Brand. Public relations Tactics. Retrieved from: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=76a4db91-6749-4475-86d1-b8926ff2660c%40sessionmgr4006

 

Morgan, N. (2017). Instagram Influencers: The Effects of Sponsorship on Follower Engagement With Fitness Instagram Celebrities. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/2014469958?pq-origsite=primo

Oberlo. (2018). How to do Instagram influencer marketing [Image]. Retrieved from:

https://www.oberlo.com/blog/instagram-influencer-marketing

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

Indigenous Australians and social networking: Post-colonial challenges and innovative digital practice

Author:  Bec Allen

Bec Allen’s work has predominantly been with Indigenous Australian young people in the development of Kimberley-based film and photography projects. Bec is currently studying her Master of Internet Communications online from the remote town of Kununurra, the home of the Miriuwung and Gajerrong people. Her paper presents some of the challenges that Indigenous Australians face when using social networking sites as well as the innovative digital practice that comes as a result.

Abstract

The Internet is shaped by the values of post-colonial culture.  This cultural hegemony is woven through legacy media forms such as film, television and print news, and informs the political landscape of modern Australia.  Despite Web 2.0’s potential for a digital democracy that might transcend society’s economic, political and cultural boundaries, equal participation in online communities is not afforded to all members of society. This paper will argue that Social Networking Sites (SNSs) can reinforce the marginalisation of Indigenous Australians and challenge cultural protocols.  It will also show that, despite these barriers to participation, the up-take of SNSs by Indigenous Australians, and FaceBook in particular, is increasing rapidly.  Indigenous Australian users are capitalising on the open and flexible nature of SNSs to produce innovative digital practices that facilitate kinship and connectivity and address the lack of political listening.

Keywords: social networking sites, Indigenous Australians, online communities, Facebook

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Indigenous Australians and social networking: Post-colonial challenges and innovative digital practice

The engineering of positive representations of non-Indigenous Australians of European descent in the Australian mainstream media reflects the dominant, post-colonial value systems that underpin modern Australian life. These values are woven through legacy media forms such as film, television and print news and inform the “economic and cultural policy” of modern Australia (Williams, 2004, p. 739).  The Internet, as a global, mass archive of knowledge and social practice, is laden with a post-colonial value system which Brabazon (2001) describes as “invisible” and a “structuring grammar for social truths” (p. 3).  Similarly, Duarte and Belarde-Lewis (2015) emphasise that “how we structure our knowledge shapes who, what, and how we can know” (p. 684).  SNSs, and FaceBook more specifically, are often celebrated as spaces for cultural expression and collective empowerment (Jarrett, 2008). However, scholarship into the field of online networked communities identifies that not all sectors of society have equal access and participation in this space. Once a promoter of Web 2.0 as an agent of democratisation, Henry Jenkins (2014) shifts his perspective to advocate for a systematic broadening of participation and to “push back” against corporatisation and government control of the Internet (p. 290). Despite the potential for SNSs to transcend economic, political and cultural boundaries, for Indigenous Australian users, post-colonial ways of presenting and managing knowledge continue to present challenges in the online world. This paper will begin by providing context to the Indigenous Australian experience in modern Australia and the ways in which this intersects with access to the Internet. It will then discuss the many forces at play within SNSs and some of challenges faced by Indigenous Australian users when participating in these online communities, specifically in the areas of social capital and identity and intellectual property and cultural protocols. Finally, it will show that the up-take of SNSs by Indigenous Australians, and FaceBook in particular, is increasing rapidly, with users capitalising on the open and flexible nature of this online community to produce innovative digital practices that facilitate kinship and connectivity and address the lack of political listening.

Australia’s turbulent history of colonialism and the subsequent inequity that plays out in the ‘gap’ between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians is well documented.  Current studies show that Indigenous Australians can expect to live 10 years less than non-Indigenous Australians (Life expectancy & deaths, 2017), with inequity manifesting in areas of health, education, politics, housing, employment and media messaging.  A decade on from the implementation of the “Closing the Gap” policy, Bunuba Elder and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, June Oscar indicates that the life expectancy gap has in fact widened and that the policy has been “all but abandoned” (Oscar as cited in Lane, 2018).  Additionally, parity of access to the Internet is an area of research highlighting that Indigenous people in remote Australia have slower Internet connections, less infrastructure and a lack of training in Internet usage (McCallum and Papandrea, 2009, p. 1233) compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts. Although commentators often position the Internet as a catalyst for positive social change which puts users in control of the technology and the message, (Wellman and Gulia, 1999, p. 2) this perspective overlooks which sectors of society are excluded and how code is controlled. Noble (2018) challenges John Perry Barlow’s influential manifesto, “The Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace” where he envisioned the Internet as a world that “all may enter without privilege or prejudice” (Barlow, 1996 as cited in Noble, 2018, p. 61). Noble argues that scholars are countering early commentators, such as Barlow (and even Jenkins), who pushed “utopian ideals associated with the rise of the Internet and its ability to free us” (p. 61).  Importantly, Noble emphasises the significant control that the engineers of the Internet have “over the mechanics of sense making” (p. 60) when we are participating in online communities.  Similarly, Arnstein (1969) warned that without the relocation of power and the access to knowledge about its workings, the dominant hegemonies will continue to advocate that all people are considered, all the while preserving the status quo (p. 216).  The Internet is complex archive of knowledge and social practice; however, it is evident that members of marginalised communities can experience the same challenges that they confront in the offline world.

Social Capital and Identity

SNSs such as FaceBook are participatory, online communities that facilitate the formation, development and maintenance of social capital and identity (Ellison, Steinfield, Lampe, 2007, p. 1). Social capital is defined as the “tangible assets…namely goodwill, fellowship, sympathy, and social intercourse” (Hanifan, 1916 as cited in Brian, 2007, p. 102) that are generated by human interactions. Facebook’s 10.82 million Australian users (“Number of Facebook users in Australia”, 2018) are participants in an “attention economy”, which encourages an assemblage of “self-presentation” techniques to entice other users, mainly through the disclosure of personal information and insights (Marwick, 2015, p. 138). boyd (2006) points out that SNSs are performative by their nature and exist in an egocentric realm of “context collapse” (p.1) where identity can be adapted for the benefit of accumulating “friends” and building the social network.  A study by Carlson (2013) finds that Indigenous Australians are using FaceBook as a vigorous means of strengthening social capital within their own communities and to represent their Aboriginality to other users and groups (p. 147-148).  Significantly, users are “Aboriginalising” their profile pages to proudly demonstrate their identity (p. 149). Carlson also notes that research into the area of “disembodied space” (like boyd’s notion of “context collapse”) cannot necessarily be applied to Indigenous Australian FaceBook users, where it is evident that “Aboriginal people embody rather that disembody their identity and social engagements” (p.148).  While it is evident that there is a strong element of self-determination in the act of resisting censorship of identity, there are also risks associated with the embodiment of Aboriginality while engaging in the Facebook community. Social commentator and activist, Celeste Liddle is an Arrernte woman who represents herself by the social media handle, “@blackfeministranter”.  Liddle uses FaceBook to discuss political issues and the ways these intersect with Indigenous identity in contemporary Australia.  A challenge faced by Liddle and many other Indigenous Australians is “platformed racism”, defined by Matamoros-Fernandez (2017) as “a new form of racism derived from the culture of social media platforms ‒ their design, technical affordances, business models and policies ‒ and the specific cultures of use associated with them” (p. 930).  Matamoros-Fernandez discuss Liddle’s open criticism of Facebook’s community standards after she shared an image of two Aboriginal women, bare-chested, participating in traditional ceremony. She was subsequently banned for publishing the image that was deemed sexually explicit, with Facebook indicating that such content infringed their policy and could “culturally offend” some users (p. 931).  Liddle reflects on the experience of being “trolled” by “a group of narrow-minded little white men” which she believes ultimately led to the ban.  She raises concerns about response by the” trolls” and the platform which “took great offence at Aboriginal women… not only inhabiting their bodies in a way that showed no shame… but also undertaking culture within a country which has continually tried to stop them from doing so” (Liddle, 2016).

Intellectual Property and Cultural Protocols

Facebook engineers the interpersonal connections of 2.2 billion active monthly users (“Number of monthly active Facebook users”, 2018).  It is these connections, and the personal data that was harvested from its users and distributed to advertisers, that generated Facebook’s $12 billion in the first quarter of 2018 (Solon, 2018).  Benedict Anderson argued that the “convergence of capitalism and print technology…created a new form of imagined community” (1991, p. 29). Certainly, the commercial foundations of Facebook where the act of sharing intellectual property (IP) in the form of written text and images is rewarded with “public approval, attention and recognition” (Malik, Dhir and Nieminen, 2015, p. 130) is testament to Anderson’s assertions.  For Indigenous Australians, Lumby (2010) points out that “Facebook provides possibilities for extending community, for establishing connectedness and cultural belonging, through networking aspects of pre-contact culture, language, the sharing of practiced rituals, information about kin or mobs that may have been lost, photographs, stories and so on” (p. 69).  However, there are community concerns around IP being shared, copied and remixed on the Internet which can contest important spiritual and custodial obligations (Dyson, 2011. p. 257).  Christie (2001) highlights that the Yolngu people of Arnhem Land view certain knowledge around land, language and ceremony as sacred.  Although Yolngu can share specific knowledge about their own IP, they are obliged to be mindful about sharing the IP of others (p.36).   Further, Christie argues that “this is very different from the western notion of knowledge, which is represented as abstract, universal, value free, not belonging to anyone in particular” (p. 36).  Notably, Facebook’s Data Policy shows that public posts may be downloaded, re-shared and seen by anyone through search engines, apps and even offline media forms such as television (“Data Policy”, 2018). Carlson and Frazer’s (2015) research looks specifically at Sorry Business (cultural observances surrounding the death of a community member) and the ways in which FaceBook has become a space for Indigenous Australians to grieve and strengthen kinship during this cultural practice.  In their study, though, Indigenous Australians expressed significant concern about the use of FaceBook during Sorry Business as the lack of control over images of the deceased can cause distress to community members (p. 215).  Facebook’s ability to memorialise the accounts of deceased users may be a useful point of remembrance for some family members. However, to have the account of a deceased family member removed may prove challenging for some Indigenous Australians. As of 2016, one in five Aboriginal births were unregistered in Western Australia (Gaffney, 2016).  Facebook’s policy for having accounts removed requires proof of identity, such as a birth certificate or will (“Memorialized Accounts, 2018) and without this kind of legal documentation, the profile of the deceased potentially remains visible, active and ultimately becomes known as “Sorry Pages” (Korff, 2017).

Kinship and Connectivity

Recent research into the use of Facebook by Indigenous Australians indicates that while many users face challenges, this is not preventing them from joining online communities.  SNS use by Indigenous Australians is “20 percent higher than the national average” and over 60 percent of the population in remote communities are active users of Facebook (Carlson and Frazer, 2015, p. 215).  Despite the issues that most Indigenous users are confronted with while online, Facebook has become a “modern site for kinship connectivity and community” and (Lumby, 2010, p. 70) can preserve cultural knowledge, grow resilience and assist in the building of social capital (Molyneaux, O’Donnell, Kakekaspan, Walmark, Budka and Gibson, 2012, p. 3-4).  Rice, Haynes, Royce and Thompson (2016) found that Indigenous Australian young people use SNS to preserve cultural identity and strengthen kinship connections to family members and their broader communities. They also found that these connections enhanced health and educational outcomes.  The notion of “hidden transcripts”, a concept coined by anthropologist, James C. Scott, describes tactics of resistance that marginalised communities employ when in public life.  The deployment of “hidden transcripts” to communicate and maintain connectivity on Facebook illustrates how Indigenous dissent can materialise online.  Users “improvise, interpret, bend and negotiate” their online experiences (Soriano, 2011, p. 2), using cultural nuances to protect knowledge from wider public consumption. For example, the FaceBook pages, “Noongars Be Like” and “Kooris be Like” build and maintain social capital and kinship connection through memes and colloquialisms which require cultural and contextual understanding for users to participate meaningfully in the online community. Soriano (2011) further explains that this form of resistance is designed to push back against the dominant hegemony and is visible only to those with membership to the subordinate group (p. 3).    This kind innovative practice is permeating through FaceBook despite the constraints that post-colonial value structures present to many Indigenous Australians.

The Politics of Listening

The representation and debate of Indigenous affairs has traditionally been restricted to legacy media forms such as film, television and print news. The affordances of SNS have facilitated an “open journalism” movement that has mediated a diverse range of perspectives in the conversation around complex issues such as Aboriginal land rights and constitutional recognition (Ingram, 2016). In response to the mediatisation of Australian life, Indigenous Australian Facebook users are using “guerrilla tactics to create alternative spaces of meaning, memory and identity” (Brabazon, 2001) and to produce innovative digital resistance against oppressive government policies. The #Sosblakaustralia movement grew out of a “grass-roots” response to the proposed government closure of Indigenous communities in remote Western Australia. Women from the Kimberley desert community of Wangkatjungka used FaceBook to campaign against the policy and to draw attention to the injustices faced by Indigenous Australians. The movement generated international attention and verified that Facebook could be used as a tool for self-determination and activism (Carlson and Frazer, 2016, p.1). The campaign was largely omitted from the Australian mainstream media news cycle, however an offline protest in Melbourne gained attention when it featured on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald with the headline, “Selfish Rabble Shut City” (2015).  Despite the attention and protest that was generated by the women of Wangkatjungka, Dreher, McCallum and Waller (2016) find that Indigenous voices are consistently challenged by the volume of content that is generated on SNS which ultimately affects their ability to be heard (p. 28).  Dreher et al points to the “politics of listening” as an essential part of an “ensemble of practices that are as necessary for democratic communications as ‘voice’ or speaking” (p. 27).  For meaningful engagement with Indigenous affairs to occur, a focus on listening rather than speaking will move the emphasis from those who are subjugated to those who dominate the political conversation (p. 28). #Sosblakaustralia remains a strong example of Indigenous Australians using Facebook to challenge the mediatisation of Indigenous issues and to enhance offline activism (Petray, 2001, p. 925). While the rigours of a new form of “open” media has birthed collective action by Indigenous Australians, the need for long-term political transformation beyond the short-term collective disruption of protest remains a critical issue (McCallum, 2016, p. 38).

Conclusions:  Growth despite challenges

This paper has addressed the challenges that Indigenous Australians face when using SNSs. The Australian mainstream media reinforces the dominant, post-colonial value systems that permeate through modern Australian life. These hegemonic frames are also embedded within our social network.  Aitchison rightfully argues that “technology is embedded within social relations of hierarchy and control” (2013, p.2). SNSs are often heralded as a democratiser of knowledge, however, this paper has demonstrated that not all sectors of society have equal access and participation in this space. Indigenous Australians are often excluded due to the lack of infrastructure, training, literacy and conflict with the dominant social paradigms that work against cultural protocols. But Web 2.0 is providing Indigenous Australians with a platform to enhance the exploration of Aboriginality and a vehicle to bypass and challenge the gatekeepers of legacy media. Notably, the Indigenous media sector in Australia is growing exponentially in reaction to misrepresentation and the desire for self-determination (Meadows and Molnar, 2010, p.19). Indigenous Australians continue to join Facebook and use the platform to enhance self-determination and produce innovative digital resistance, both online and offline.

Banner image CCO Creative Commons

References

Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism.   Retrieved from https://sisphd.wikispaces.com/file/view/Benedict_Anderson_Imagined_Communities.pdf

Aguiton, C. & Cardon, D. (2007). The Strength of Weak Cooperation: An Attempt to Understand the Meaning of Web 2.0. Communications & Strategies, 65(1). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1009070

Aitchison, G. (2013, April 22). How capitalism is turning the internet against democracy, and how to turn it back. Open Democracy. Retrieved from: https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1332313296?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo

Arnstein, S. (1969). A Ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35 (4). 216-224.             https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225

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

Brabazon, T. (2001), How imagined are virtual communities? Retrieved from:  http://motspluriels.arts.uwa.edu.au/MP1801tb2.html

Brian, K. (2007).  OECD Insights Human Capital How what you know shapes your life: How what you know shapes your     life. Massachusetts: OECD Publishing.

Carlson, B. (2013). The ‘new frontier’: Emergent Indigenous identities and social media. In M. Harris, M. Nakata & B.             Carlson (Eds.), The Politics of Identity: Emerging Indigeneity (pp. 147-168). Sydney: University of Technology             Sydney E-Press.

Carlson, B. & Frazer, R. (2015).  “It’s like going to a cemetery and lighting a candle”: Aboriginal Australians, sorry             business and social media. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 11(3), 211-224. http://ro.uow.edu.au/lhapapers/2410/

Carlson, B. & Frazer, R. (2016).  Indigenous activism and social media: a global response to #SOSBLAKAUSTRALIA.In A. McCosker, S. Vivienne & A. Johns (Eds.), Negotiating Digital Citizenship: Control, Contest and Culture             (pp. 115-130). London: Rowman and Littlefield International.

Christie, M. (2001). Aboriginal Knowledge on the Internet. A Journal of Australian Indigenous Issues. 19, 33-50. https://search-informit-com-au.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/fullText;dn=995871709795240;res=IELIND

Data Policy. (2018).  Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/update

Dreher, T., McCallum, K. & Waller, L. (2016). Indigenous voices and mediatized policy-making in the digital age. Information, Communication and Society 19(1). 23 – 39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1093534

Duarte, M. E. & Belarde-Lewis, M. (2015). Imagining: Creating spaces for indigenous ontologies. Cataloguing and Classification Quarterly 53(5-6), 677-702. DOI: 10.1080/01639374.2015.1018396

Dyson, L. (2011) Indigenous Peoples on the Internet. In M. Consalvo & C. Ess The Handbook of Internet Studies. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C. & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12 (4), 1143–1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x

Gaffney, D. (2016). No identity: one in five Aboriginal births unregistered in WA.  Retrieved from             https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2016/07/04/no-identity–one-in-five-aboriginal-births-unregistered-in-wa.html

Ingram, J. (2016). Do the Guardian’s Losses Mean Its “Open Journalism” Has Failed? Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2016/02/03/guardian-losses/

Jarrett, K. (2008). Interactivity is evil!  A critical investigation of Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(3).       http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2140/1947

Jenkins, H. (2013). Rethinking ‘Rethinking Convergence/Culture’. Cultural Studies, 28:2, 267-297.             DOI:10.1080/09502386.2013.801579

Korff, J. (2017). Aboriginal use of social media.  Retrieved from             https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/media/aboriginal-use-of-social-media

Lane, S. (Producer).(2018, February 8). Closing the Gap outcomes disappointing but not hopeless: Commissioner [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/am/closing-the-gap-policies-all-but-abandoned:- june-oscar/9407342

Liddle, C. (2016). Looking Past White Australia And White Feminism. Retrieved from              https://newmatilda.com/2016/03/09/looking-past-white-australia-and-white-feminism/

Life expectancy & deaths. (2017). Australia, Australian Institute of health and Welfare. Retrieved from             https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports-statistics/health-conditions-disability-deaths/life-expectancy-deaths/overview

Lumby, B. L. (2010). Cyber-Indigeneity: Urban Indigenous identity on Facebook. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 39, 68-75. http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2271&context=artspapers

Malik, A., Dhir, A., & Nieminen, M. (2015). Uses and Gratifications of Digital Photo Sharing on Facebook. Telematics and Informatics. 33 (1), 129-138. DOI:10.1016/j.tele.2015.06.009

Marwick, A. (2015). Instafame: Luxury Selfies in the Attention Economy. Public Culture, 27(175), p.137 – 160. DOI:             10.1215/08992363-2798379

Matamoros-Fernández, A. (2017) Platformed racism: the mediation and circulation of an Australian race-based controversy on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.  Information, Communication & Society, 20 (6), 930-946, DOI:     10.1080/1369118X.2017.1293130

McCallum, K. & Papandrea, F. (2009).  Community business: The internet in remote Australian Indigenous communities.    New Media & Society, 11(7), 1230-1251.  DOI: 10.1177/1461444809342059

Meadows, M. & Molnar, H. (2010). Bridging the Gaps: Towards a history of Indigenous media in Australia. Media History, 8(1), 9-20. DOI: 10.1080/13688800220134473

Memorialized Accounts. (2018).  Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/help/1506822589577997

Molyneaux, H., O’Donnell, S., Kakekaspan, C., Walmark, B., Budka, P., & Gibson, K. (2012) Community  Resilience and Social Media: Remote and Rural First Nations Communities, Social Isolation and Cultural             Preservation. Paper for the 2012 International Rural Network Forum, Whyalla and Upper Spencer Gulf, Australia,         24-28 September. http://meeting.knet.ca/mp19/file.php/16/Publications/2012-            Community_Resilience_and_Social_Media.pdf

Noble, S.U. (2018).  Algorithms of Oppression.: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. USA: New York University Press

Number of Facebook users in Australia from 2015 to 2022. (2018). Retrieved from             https://www.statista.com/statistics/304862/number-of-facebook-users-in-australia/

Number of monthly active Facebook users worldwide as of 4th quarter 2017 (in millions). (2018).  Retrieved from             https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/

Petray, T. L. (2011). Protest 2.0: online interactions and Aboriginal activists. Media Culture & Society, 33(6), 923-940. DOI: 10.1177/0163443711411009

Rice, E.S., Haynes. E., Royce, P. & Thompson, S.C. (2016). Social media and digital technology use among Indigenous young people in Australia.  International Journal for Equity in Health. 15 (81), DOI: 10.1186/s12939-016-0366-0

“Selfish Rabble Shut City” (2015).  Sydney Morning Herald.

Solon, O. (2018). Facebook posts record revenues for first quarter despite privacy scandal.  Retrieved from             https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/25/facebook-first-quarter-2018-revenues-zuckerberg

Soriano, C. R. (2011). The arts of indigenous online dissent: Negotiating technology, indigeneity, and activism in the Cordillera. Telematics and Informatics. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2011.04.004

Wellman, B. & Gulia, M. (1999). Net Surfers Don’t Ride Alone: Virtual Communities as Communities. In P. Kollock, & M. Smith (Eds.), Communities and Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.

Williams, M. (2004). On the Discriminations of Postcolonialism in Australia and New Zealand. University of Toronto Quarterly. 73 (2) p. 739-754.  Retrieved from https://muse-jhu-edu.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/article/518046/pdf