social network – Debating Communities and Networks IX

Online Media Platforms and Social Networking allow for Deceptive Communication to Occur Online with Ease

Online Media Platforms and Social Networking allow for

Deceptive Communication to Occur Online with Ease

Abstract

This paper explores the connection between social networking platforms and the arise of deceptive communication in cyberspace as social media and technology become more interweaved into everyday routines. The purpose of this paper is to assess how online platforms are changing the role and meaning of identity when evaluating online forums and whether social networking has encouraged deceptive communications upon individuals as new technologies have allowed for misleading and disingenuous interactions with ease. Through analyzing examples and various author studies, further clarity on this topic should be provided to understand if social platforms do indeed influence traditional communications and interactions and if in turn, have affected how identity and communities should be comprehended online.

Keywords: social networks, identity, online identity, community, social media, deceptive interactions, catfishing.

Online Media Platforms and Social Networking allow for

Deceptive Communication to Occur Online with Ease

Technology has had a profound effect on the way it has encouraged individuals to come together and communicate (Smith and Kollock, 1999). Online media platforms allow for interactions to differ from traditional face-to-face encounters, which can allow for deceptive communication to occur online, which can result in the presence of a misconstrued and phony identities being commonplace online. This has given way to the arise of catfishing and dishonest interactions in social networking platforms and within dating communities. These social networks have stripped away many of the core signals and concepts that make up the qualities of a conventional face-to-face encounter and therefore has made it easier for phonies to appear on social networks as someone they are not. (Smith and Kollock, 1999) On these said online networks, communication is fast, inexpensive and reaches people at a world-wide level with platforms that allow for collaboration and interaction that has not yet been seen before this recent decade. (Smith and Kollock, 1999) This raises questions such as “How is the internet changing our basic concepts of identity, self-governance, and community?” (Smith and Kollock, 1999, p. 1). The powerful rise of social networking in accordance with the intensive reliance on technology this modern age has allowed, has encouraged individuals to take part in deceptive activities online, such as the introduction of ‘Catfishing’ on online platforms.

How the Rise of the Net has altered the meaning of Identity Online

The role of identity when evaluating social networks (and the communities that are created within these networks) is significant. When interacting within these social networks and communities, being aware of the persons who you are communicating and interacting with is vital. When communicating in the physical realm, individuals can be certain of whom they are connecting with, due to all the bodily cues that come with physical interaction. When evaluating virtual communication, it’s a very different premise (Donath, 1999). The online world allows people into a space which is abundant with interactive social platforms in which individuals are able to engage and meet with each other. “Instead of people talking to machines, networks are being used to connect people to people…These shifts make the creation of thousands of spaces to house conversations and exchanges between far-flung groups of people practical and convenient. Using network interaction media like email, chat and conferencing systems people have formed thousands of groups to discuss a range of topics, play games, entertain one another and even work on a range of complex collective projects” (Smith and Kollock, 1999, p.3) This has given rise to a completely new definition of identity when evaluating users of the internet, with parallel and multiple identities existing through innumerable platforms through virtual screens at a global scale (Turkle, 1997).

As Pearson (2009 n.p) outlines “Identity- as- performance is seen as part of the flow of social interaction as individuals construct identity performances fitting their milieu. With a heightened self–consciousness, online environments take this construction of performance to another level.” The internet’s technological advancement that has made way for an abundance of social networks, has indeed contributed to the sense of identity for individuals online. The introduction of these social networks is substantial, as the usage of these networks has webbed its way into countless individual’s everyday lives. Considering the limitless social network communities available to people, individuals can now express their identities through social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat. Through Blogs, Wikis or YouTube or even through dating communities like Tinder, eHarmony, and Bumble. There are endless opportunities for consumers of the net to latch their identities onto and “Real life can be just ‘one more window’” (Turkle, 1997, p. 74) These social spaces and platforms in which people are now engaging in and expressing these identities has given rise to the question, are the people we meet and interact with online, in this window, to be trusted?

The Net is Allowing for Deceptive Communication Online with Ease

The rise of the internet has also given rise to questions about the genuineness of the individuals we interact with online, as self-presentation of individuals is an aspect that can be controlled easily raising thought about the authenticity of others online. “We begin with a consideration of identity, the basic building block of social interaction. All of our interactions, even those with strangers, are shaped by our sense of with whom we are interacting. In face-to-face and telephone interactions, there are a wealth of cues of varying reliability to indicate our identity and our intentions. Our clothes, voices, bodies, and gestures signal messages about status, power and group membership. We rely on our ability to recognize fellow group members in order to know who we can turn to and what we can expect.” (Smith and Kollock, 1991, p.8) With these distinctive physical cues stripped away, it leaves space for the imagination to replace what isn’t there. This means anyone on the internet can be anybody or anything they wish to be. The ease of self-presentation has never been so achievable for individuals and the will to create a persona for yourself is one that many find intriguing. “Critics worry that life on the net can never be a meaningful or complete because it will lead people away from the full range of in-person contact. Or, they worry that people will get so engulfed in the simulacrum virtual reality, they will lose contact with real life” (Wellman & Guilla, 1997). Not only is it of concern that meaning, and loss of contact is possible, But, what does self-presentation mean for individuals online? Are internet users under threat of ingeniousness and unsafe encounters? “O’Brien points out that there is a strain between those who view online interaction as an opportunity to ‘perform’ a variety of perhaps fabricated roles versus those who see cyberspace as a new communication medium between “real people” (Smith and Kollock, 1999, p.12). Moreover, how are we to define and decide who a real person is?

On differing social network platforms, the terms and conditions generally differ regarding whether the users of the site are able to communicate through an alternative identity than the one they were ‘legally assigned’ (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015). An example of this; is the controversial “real-name” anti-anonymity movement that Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg is leading. The user policies Facebook outlines specifically state that users are expected to identify as one person. With Zuckerberg stating, “having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity” (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015, n.p). However, this has caused some uproar from the drag queen community after Facebook commenced a mass deletion of personal pages from those who prefer to use stage names rather than legitimate names (Buhr, 2014).

Participants of the drag community believe they identify with their stage identities more so than their lawful one and are protesting for the right to express this online. (Buhr, 2014) An extract from their appeal is as follows; “We cannot emphasize enough that Facebook is a poor arbiter of what is or isn’t a real name. Performers with legitimate-appearing names get locked out of their accounts while people with account names like “Jane ICanBeBadAllByMyself Doe” go without scrutiny” (Buhr, 2015, n.p). However, on the flipside of this argument, some argue that the allowance of using multiple identities or illegitimate identities online can be extremely dangerous and can cause major turmoil for some participants of the online world, there have been known “catfishing” incidences that are becoming commonplace amongst Facebook as well as many other social networking sites. “The net is only one of many ways in which the same people may interact. It is not a separate reality. People bring to their online interactions such baggage as their gender, stage in the life-cycle, cultural milieu, socioeconomic status, and off-line connections with others” (Wellman & Guila, 1997, p.3) But what does this signify for our basic concepts of identity, self-presentation and community when people connecting on the social realm have imagined up their own separate reality, and these factors are not true to the person behind the screen.

Deceiving Communication, Phoney Identities and Catfishing Incidence on Social Media and Dating Platforms

The use of modern technology has become a 21^st-century cultural necessity to most individuals, most finding it hard to function without the usage of social media in their daily routines. That being said, there are also certain risks that may accompany the use of particular social networking sites. With online deception and catfishing becoming relatively normal to the online realm, users are at risk of experiencing threatening and misleading encounters online (Blazka, Smith & Smith, 2017). ‘Catfishing’ is a term that encompasses the action of an individual online, enacting on an incident of treachery and deceit by fictionalizing an entire being on the virtual realm (Kotteman, 2015). These predators assume the role of an alternative identity to deliberately trick people into a fictitious romantic or emotive relationship by stealing somebody else’s personal information and pictures or by fabricating a unique identity, and in online forums, this act is becoming progressively more mainstream (Kotteman, 2015). One of the first globally documented cases of Catfishing was recorded by known NFL football player Manti Te’o who was fooled into believing his cyber girlfriend, Lennay Kekua, had passed away from leukaemia, or had even existed (Blazka et al., 2017).

The investigators of the case state; “There was no Lennay Kekua. … She was not diagnosed with cancer, did not spend time in the hospital, did not engage in a lengthy battle with leukaemia. She never had a bone marrow transplant. She did not request he send white flowers to her funeral. Her favourite colour was not white. Her brother, Koa, did not inform Manti Te’o that she was dead. She did not exist. (Kotteman, 2015, p. 2). She was merely a creation of someone’s imagination to intentionally deceive. After the relationship between Te’o and fictitious Lennay had been so deeply broadcasted by the media, the world was introduced to the phenomenon of Catfishing, and individuals felt disturbed and scared of the online realm they assumed they could trust (Kotteman, 2015). Catfishing is not only common on social networking sites such as Facebook but has also found its way into genuine dating platforms used by innocent customers whom are intentionally searching for a life partner. “With more than one-third of relationships being facilitated through Internet dating and with 45% of online daters citing social networking sites as the primary way in which they connect with potential mates, there are clear psychological and relational implications that make studying online interaction more important than ever” (Kadrich, 2016, p.9).

The conception of online dating has given humankind the chance to witness and observe the shifting traditional standards surrounding relationships online and understand the significant features of online behaviour, such as “impression formation and self-presentation strategies” (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015, p. 415). As online dating has considerably transformed from being a “marginal to mainstream social practice” (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015, p. 415) over the past decade with 17.5% of internet users claiming they have tried online dating (Kadrich,2016 ), it can be imagined how many individuals now contribute to the online dating world and what that could signify for the genuine partakers who are forced to engage with phonies, and how these misconstrued identities are becoming more common to ensnare a stranger. In some cases, Catfishing is used as a method to scam lonely and vulnerable romantics. Ian Doney was one of many victims of Catfishing, who at 51 years of age, trusted he had finally found love after finding a woman on a single persons website (Computer Act!ve, 2017). He was scammed out of thousands of dollars, sending his ‘love’, money to meet him abroad. She never showed up. He tried again to send her money and meet her, again, to no avail. Doney was eventually scammed into substantial debts and subsequently struggled to afford basic necessities or to even eat. He eventually spiraled into an immense depression and eventually paid the ultimate price by slitting his wrists and ending his life (Computer Act!ve, 2017).

This is just one example of the dire and extensive effects Catfishing and dishonest social networking can have on innocent victims, with researching showing “that roughly 20% of online dating service users use deceptive tactics” (Kadrich, 2016, p. 52) Even if the deception is something as minor as to enhance their appearance online to appear more desirable or lying about education, culture or class (Kadrich, 2016). It is evident that the technologically reliant world in which we live is increasingly becoming more deceptive on these social networking platforms used by individuals everyday, due to the ease and effortlessness it takes for individuals to conjure up a phony identity and ensnare a stranger.

Conclusions

To close, it is undeniably apparent that modern technology has had a powerful impact on the development and progression of social networks and the way in which individuals are now choosing to interact and communicate online with other fellow networkers. As the net provides a space for individuals that is substantially varying to that of a traditional face-to-face encounter due to the lack of bodily cues, it is proving to be a space that can allow for deceptive communication with ease. The existence of fraudulent and phoney identities is becoming more commonplace with cases of catfishing and deception occurring at a high rate on varying social platforms. This is due to the effortlessness it takes for these imitation artists to fictionalise an entire identity on these platforms that run with accessibility and convenience. It is ascertaining to be a space that is potentially threatening concepts of identity and community as we know it and revolutionising how we comprehend these concepts online.

References

Blazka, M., Smith, L.E., & Smith, K.D. (2017). Follow Me, What the Harm? Considerations of Catfishing and Utilizing Fake Online Personas on Social Media. Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport, 27, 32-90. Retrieved from http://heinonline.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/jlas27&page=32&collection=journals#

Buhr, S. (2014). Facebook won’t budge on letting drag queens keep their names. TechCrunch Retrieved from http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/18/facebook-wont-budge-on-letting-drag-queens-keep-their-names/.

Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415-441. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x

How can we Detect Online Dating Scammers? (2017). Computer Act!ve (504), 11. Retrieved from https://search-proquest com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1940858972?accountid=10382

Kadrich, M. (2016). Examining the Use of False Identities in Online Romantic Interactions. Retrieved from Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1832346720?accountid=10382

Kottemann, K. L. (2015). The Rhetoric of Deliberate Deception: What Catfishing Can TeachUs. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1707929589?accountid=10382

Smith, M. A., Kollock, P., & Ebooks, C. (1999). Communities in cyberspace / edited

by Marc A. Smith and Peter Kollock. London ; New York: London ; New York : Routledge.

Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Virtual Communities as Communities: net surfers don’t ride alone. In M. A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 167-194). Retrieved from http://groups.chass.utoronto.ca/netlab/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Net-Surfers-Dont-Ride-Alone-Virtual-Community-as-Community.pdf

Van der Nagel, E., & Frith, J. (2015). Anonymity, pseudonymity, and the agency ofonline identity: Examining the social practices of r/Gonewild. First Monday, 20(3), <xocs:firstpage xmlns:xocs=””/>. doi:10.5210/fm.v20i3.5615

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

Pearson, E. (2009). All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in onlinesocial networks. First Monday, 14(3). doi:10.5210/fm.v14i3.2162

Turkle, S. (1997). Multiple Subjectivity and Virtual Community at the End of the Freudian Century. Sociological Inquiry, 67(1), 72-84. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1997.tb00430.x

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

Social Networks: Public Relations and Twitter Communities

Keely Duffield

Curtin University

Abstract

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

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

Introduction

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

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

Advantages of the Twitter Community and online communication

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

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

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

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

Case Study: American Red Cross Organisation

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

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

Limitations of online communication strategies in communities

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

Conclusion

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conflict, Authenticity and Deception: The Impact of Trolls on Communities and Networks

Abstract

This paper will discuss how identities within technologically mediated communication channels have drastically impacted communication between online community members. This communication failure has resulted in conflicts within online communication sites, such as Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter. This paper discusses the lack in social capital which will eventuate in conflict and friction within an online community. The focus on identities highlight the differences that are perceived by other community members including trolls by utilising examples such as the Madeline McCann case and the Australian Republic Movement. These differences are based on interpersonal comparisons reflecting past experiences in dealing with all aspects of authenticity and deception.

Keywords: Conflict, social network, identity, community, authenticity, deception, social capital.

Introduction

Conflict is applicable in all forms of communication, both online and offline, which often stem from within a form of a community. Typically, this conflict is due to a clash of identities with individuals or group of identities in specific community, were levels of support differs from community members. Communities are defined as a group of people that depend on social involvement and communication. (Katz et al., 2004, p. 217) This is evident through the traditional face-to-face discussions most commonly used today or alternatively through an internet-mediated communication channel, such as Facebook Messenger, Instagram or YouTube. But either way, conflict is inevitable within communities where identities express member opinions over a thread of time or a subject matter. This paper will argue that the lack of social capital will create conflict (friction) in an online community from identities that are empowered by community member differences through online communities. These differences are based on interpersonal comparisons reflecting past experiences within the aspects of authenticity and deception with a focus on trolls within social media.

Expression of Identity on Social Media

Before we dive deeper into how conflict manifests through social media and trolling. Jensen based his media definition as the “socially formed resources that enable human beings to articulate an understanding of reality, and to engage in communications about it with others” (2008, p.45). This definition best describes the differences in traditional communications whereas digital interactions utilises modern technology mediated devices enabling online communications. With this understanding, it is essential to note that the main difference between offline and online communities is that online communities are not bound by geographical locations and are asynchronous. Some communities are started offline with face-to-face contact and then precede to move online, a common example would be a group chat through Facebook messenger. This community is formed offline in a social physical space, which then moved online for convenience and accessibility before meeting offline again. Sole online communities, in comparison are formed without any face-to-face contact and communication is sent to multiple members, often being instantaneous, resulting in zero-time delay between messages. These online communities have no intention of progressing offline to remain anonymous and create their own performed identity.

A large majority of these online communities are commonly held on Web 2.0 platforms. Boyd and Elision define social networking sites as “web-based services that allow individuals to; construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system; articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection; and view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system” (2007, p.4). Social networking sites such as Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn, allows ‘friends’ that embodies a weaker bond in a relationship between members. Hence the membership process of a social networking site, members have an opportunity to protect their personal interest by not disclosing informative data on their profile. These social networking sites in the main do not verify any information, reinforcing the view that a members ‘online self’ may be different to their ‘actual self’. This process provides choices for members to participate within an online community, creating an opportunity for friction or conflict to arise.

Online community membership grants you several choices in order to express a non-verbal expression; whether the message remains authentic or deceptive about your identity online. Within these communities, members can remain individualistic within a group or provide support to other group members which requires time or expertise in the online community. Jensen (2011) defines this choice of social interactions as relations of availability, accessibility and performativity. That is “What is known……? Who knows what……? and Who says and does what – in relation to whom?” (Jensen, 2011, p.50). As an example, conflict may can stem from the use of Facebook to market an event, where the invitee loses control with unexpected attendees via mass communication to unintended participants. This concept underpins the notion that our online identity comes with a choice.

Further Pearson states that “Online, users can claim to be whoever they wish. Like actors playing a role, they can deliberately choose to put forth identity cues or claims of self that can closely resemble or wildly differ from reality” (2009, p. 1). Pearson then goes one to argue that our identity is like a performance, everchanging to suit the situation, meaning that our identity is not fixed at any point in time, but is instead a fluid construct that is evolving into what we deem appropriate. A key concept to this argument is that members of an online community may hide their true identity in full or part, where misaligned intentions can create conflict within an online community. This concept may lead to conflicts within social networks as it opens the door to deceptive conduct within the community, disturbing the flow of interaction (Coles & West, 2016).

Identity and the Community

A key feature of a community is that it must itself have a sense of identity, which are known to the members within the community (Kendall, 2011). Furthermore a community itself “confers identity and participant identities also play an important part in the formation and continuation of communities” (Kendall, 2011, p.318). From the above quotes, it can be applied that members may not contain similar knowledge and attitudinal elements of a ‘real community’ but in fact be dissimilar. This contradiction as described by Kendall (2011), directly relates to online communities – where conflict and/or friction between members may arise. Further, members are concerned about the ability of a community to mask their identity, which can relate to whether a participant is authentic or deceptive while engaging online. This was evident in the case of Madeline McCann where communities clashed over the parent’s involvement her disappearance. These communities were recognised as either Anti-McCann’s or Pro-McCann’s. These groups clashed over twitter, creating friction and conflict between the participants, that lead to different group identities within the one community. Both identities used emotive language to enhance their identities while at the same time strengthening the divide between the two groups (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017).

Emotional baggage held by group members can also lead to different identities that share common threads in the most part but be polar opposite on other views. This is particularly most noticeable with identifiers such as a person race and gender (Kendall, 2011). Donath raises the point that “knowing the identity of those with whom you communicate is essential for understanding and evaluating an interaction” (1999, p.1) particularly where the evaluation outcome is subjective. This was demonstrated with the differing opinions on how the Republic Movement in Australia provided alternative methods to select their head of state, appointment versus election (Charnock, 2001). Kendall (2011, p.318) further stated that group members can “mask their identity, or to present a deliberately deceptive identity”, to notionally benefit their members where they feel best represents themselves, authentic or not. As in the Republic Movement, the perception bias of this selection can create friction and prevent the movement progressing within the political online community.

Social Capital

It is important to consider the level of social capital required to create and maintain any social network. Figure 1, as shown in the Appendix represents a framework for the creation and maintenance of online communities is grounded on sociological and information technology concepts (Vivian & Sudweeks, 2003). The framework demonstrates the connection between social spaces, social capital and identity for members in the social formation of relationships. Overall social capital can be beneficial to online communities as it creates trust and honesty between members, which is vital for the survival of the online community. Eklinder-Frick, Eriksson & Hallén (2015, p.2) defines social capital as a “resource in society, where it is associated with trust and social cohesion”. Even with idiosyncratic opinions – online communities can thrive as long as trust and honesty prevails in the community. However as stated by Annen (2003, p.451) social capital is described “as a player’s reputation for being cooperative within a social network”, where any conflict within this framework can only assume the greater good will be accepted from members in determining the final outcome. But unfortunately, this is not likely to occur where cooperation is required and not forthcoming in communities where controlling behaviours from individuals does not conform to typical norms. A lack of cooperation will further discourage trust and create conflict / friction with differing knowledge and attitudinal elements over time. This is reinforced by Annen (2003) where control over a community is only developed over time and through regular communications. A lack of participation by members due to conflict will lead to poor online community performance.

Authenticity

When members participate in online communities, a conflict or friction situation is bound to occur given the membership process for social networking sites, even if the members are being authentic to themselves. This is due to the fact that every member’s idiosyncratic opinion originates from distinct cultural backgrounds and past experiences. According to Buendgens-Kosten, authenticity in its broadest sense is “related to the notions of realness or trueness to origin” (2014, p.1) and is referenced to the characterisation of language to the quality of text (spoken or written). So, while it is important to remain authentic to one’s self while participating in online communication sites, it is critical to remain cautious to the dangers of the internet as it is related to members cultural backgrounds and limiting the amount of identity performance taken place. This is done in a hope to avoid being characterised as a troll, who are aggressive, disruptive and deceitful (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017).

Deception

Social networking sites also allows for fake accounts to be created, where impersonation between members can occur with no mechanism to actualise the authentic identity. Regrettably, indirect trust is assumed for social networking sites without any verification. This deceitful tactic is most commonly known as catfishing, where one individual lures someone into a relationship through a false or factious persona. This is a downfall of online communities with no way to authenticate your identity within these communities. This idea of social caption and trust are closely linked as deceitful communication tactics represents a lack of social capital, allowing the likes of trolls and catfishes to “create conflict for amusements sake” (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017, p.76) which further reinforces the need for members to protect their identity online. As an example, Stone (1992), shows a woman who was supposedly talking to a ‘fully disabled old lady’ named ‘Julie’, who in actual fact turned out to be a “middle aged male psychiatrist” who simply wanted to talk to other women as a woman (Stone, 1992, p.2). In this case while the intent was not malicious the tactic demonstrate deception, mis-trust and potential conflict.

Deception can also be found in social networks through the concept of trolling. This is where someone pretends to be a genuine member of a community, by sharing the passion and identity of a group, but then deliberately attempts to “disrupt the community by baiting participants” (Kendall, 2011, 319). Baiting is the process in which a member of the online community deliberately posts to anger or disrespect other members of the community. The consequences of such trolling, as stated by Donath (1999, p.71) is that; “Trolls can be costly in several ways. A troll can disrupt the discussion on a newsgroup, disseminate bad advice, and damage the feeling of trust in the newsgroup community.” Furthermore, in an online community that has become sensitised to trolling “the rate of deception is high – many honestly naive questions may be quickly rejected as trollings” (Donath, 1999, p.71). This extract reinforces the damage that trolls can have on a online community, but also the level of conflict or friction that can arise between the troll and the impacted existing members.

Trolling is a common problem today with some serious cases punished by criminal conviction, however these consequences are the exception rather than the rule (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017). This has resulted in the spreadability of trolling, which has in the majority been unpoliced. The increase in trolling has followed the rise in social media networks, with the number of social network users purported to be 2.46 billion as of 2017 (Statista, 2018). With this significant statistic, it’s only a matter of time before conflict rises between users, with social capital and trust being eroded from online communities. An example of trolling was evident in the aftermath of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in 2007. This case saw a group of trolls on twitter, under pseudonyms, posting about how the parents were responsible for the abduction of their daughter (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017). These tweets were often “abusive and antagonistic and are also known to engage in verbal attacks against anyone who takes to Twitter to support the McCanns” (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017, p.71). The consequences of trolling through online communities, can often lead to the polarisation of beliefs, attitudes and values amongst the community, making trolling not only unpleasant but also very unethical where it has the ability to cause great harm (Coles & West, 2016). The actions of trolling has the potential to generate vast amounts of conflict and friction with communities, which can span years. This is evident in the McCann case with the hashtag on twitter receiving 100 tweets every hour (Synnott, Coulias & Ioannou, 2017). Deception and indirect trust are key concerns for members within online communities today, without a foundation of authenticity.

Conclusion

This paper discussed the key elements that formed the creation and maintenance of online communities which highlighted the importance of identities, social capital and the relationships built in the social formation of an online community. With these concepts, frameworks and constructs, I have argued that conflict and or friction can apply in all forms of online communities where authenticity is non-existent. This conflict is substantially due to the expression of idiosyncratic opinions within communities that impact community identities over a thread of time and subject. This paper argues that the lack in social capital will create conflict and friction where differences exist in attitudes between members on the basis of past experiences in dealing with the all aspects of authenticity and deception.

Appendix

Figure 1: A conceptual framework for the creation and maintenance of social networks (Vivian & Sudweeks, 2003).

References

Annen, K. (2003). Social capital, inclusive networks, and economic performance. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 50(4), 449-463. doi:10.1016/S0167-2681(02)00035-5

Baym, N. K. (2011). Social Networks 2.0. In M. Consalvo & C. Ess (Eds.), The Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 385-405). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x

Buendgens-Kosten, J. (2014). Authenticity. ELT J., 68(4), 457-459. doi:10.1093/elt/ccu034

Coles, B. A., & West, M. (2016). Trolling the trolls: Online forum users constructions of the nature and properties of trolling. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 233-244. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.070

Charnock, D. (2001). National identity, partisanship and populist protest as factors in the 1999 Australian republic referendum. Australian Journal of Political Science, 36(2), 271-291. doi:doi:10.1080/10361140120078826

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

Eklinder-Frick, J., Eriksson, L. T., & Hallén, L. (2015). Social Capital, Individuality and Identity. Paper presented at the IMP Conference, Kolding, Denmark. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:820088/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Jensen, K. B. (2008). Media (Vol. 9). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Jensen, K. B. (2011). New Media, Old Methods –Internet Methodologies and the Online/Offline Divide. In M. Consalvo & C. Ess (Eds.), The Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 43-58). Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

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, pp. 315-371): Routledge.

Kendall, L. (2011). Community and the Internet. In M. Consalvo & C. Ess (Eds.), The Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 310-325). Hoboken, NK: Blackwall Publishing Ltd.

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

Statista. (2018). Number of social network users worldwide from 2010 to 2021 (in billions) [Fact sheet]. Retrieved from

https://www.statista.com/statistics/278414/number-of-worldwide-social-network-users/

Stone, A. R. (1992). Will the real body please stand up? In M. Benedikt (Ed.), Cyberspace: First Steps (pp. 81-118). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Synnott, J., Coulias, A., & Ioannou, M. (2017). Online trolling: The case of Madeleine McCann. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 70-78. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.053

Vivian, N., & Sudweeks, F. (2003). Social Networks in transnational and Virtual Communities Informing Science, 1-7.

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

Deceptive dating: how the online identities formed in Facebook dating communities benefit the individual user rather than the goals of the community.

Abstract

Online deception is rife, and despite the illusion of Facebook authentically representing offline users, this platform is susceptible to dishonesty through changeable user identity. Flaws are often hidden, allowing users to display idealised versions of themselves to sustain cultural appeal and/or social interaction. Despite the risks, online users continue to engage in Facebook dating, relying on ineffective group rules to protect against undesirables. This paper explores the stream of identity in communities and networks by focusing on Facebook’s appeal as an online dating community and the ways in which online identities are used to benefit individual users rather than the dating groups they join.

Keywords

Online identity, dating, Facebook, romance, deception, Catfish, SNS, social network, communities, Internet.

Introduction

It is not uncommon for singles to portray the best version of themselves when attracting a potential mate. Perhaps this pressure to impress is even more prevalent online, with users relying on morality and instincts to navigate the Internet dating world. This paper discusses how online identities formed in Facebook dating groups benefit individual users rather than these communities. To best explore this topic, it is essential to establish why Facebook is chosen as a platform for romantic connections, and then determine how online identity is malleable. By establishing these topics prior to critically analysing user and community goals, a foundation for discussion is created, and vital research in Internet dating and online identity are established. Online user benefits will then be discussed, with motivations divided into two categories; users who intend to establish a romantic connection offline, and those who do not intend to pursue relationships beyond the virtual platform. Once these user goals are established these motivations will then be compared to the goals of Facebook dating communities, demonstrating how ambitions can differ.

‘Facebook Official’: Dating Online

Facebook is a pioneer in social networking, offering its users global communication. The website is a convenient way of connecting with friends-of-friends, or an effective method of bonding with a community independent of one’s offline network. It is not surprising then that Facebook groups are dedicated to cultivating sexual and romantic desire, offering communities where users can network with other like-minded individuals. According to Arora (as cited in Toma, 2017, p. 425) there are four main reasons why Facebook is a leading community for online dating, particularly in low socioeconomic areas. These four motivations not only provide insight into Facebook’s online dating appeal, but also suggest how users can utilise the malleability of online identity for their personal gain. These four main reasons are as follows.

Firstly, Facebook is cheap and accessible (Toma, 2017). Facebook’s free personal use is appealing to a mass population, attracting low socioeconomic users globally. Unlike eHarmony, Match.com and RSVP, Facebook dating communities are free to join, enabling more accessibility to groups dedicated to single people.

Facebook can overcome cultural restrictions (Toma, 2017). In countries like India where marriages are often arranged, there can be cultural restrictions that hinder communication between singles. Facebook is used as a means of interacting with the opposite sex outside of religious or cultural boundaries. The website can also be used as a method of exploring areas of sexual interest before committing to lifestyle changes. For instance, LBGTIQ communities can be joined without influencing the user’s offline lifestyle. In this way, Facebook is a tool for socially restricted users when overcoming cultural boundaries, avoiding public scrutiny or maintaining privacy.

Facebook allows all socioeconomic classes, nationalities and cultures to connect as equals, on a global scale (Toma, 2017). The site encourages users from different geographic locations, socioeconomic backgrounds and cultures to communicate. In doing so, Facebook does not restrict the types of people that users may encounter. Unlike Match.com that relies on geographic location and mathematical equations to predict compatibility, Facebook does not limit who a user can contact. This accessibility allows users to meet with people of different (or higher) social classes, or interact with people they may not usually encounter.

Facebook reinforces norms of politeness when interacting with strangers (Toma, 2017). A large appeal of the Facebook platform is the potential to “friend” request strangers, and often being accepted as means of not committing “a social faux pas” (Toma, 2017, p. 425). By taking the chance to friend request an attractive user the likelihood of initiating a romantic relationship increases with more contact, despite the reason for a user initially accepting the friend request.

These four reasons support the thesis statement as they position Facebook as a popular source for online dating. These reasons also introduce Facebook’s vulnerabilities as an online dating platform, particularly regarding changeable user identities.

The Best of Me is the Worst of Me: The Changeable Online Identity

Online user identity is complex due to its changeability. The Internet self is fluid, with age, sex, disposition and appearance now a choice instead of permanent traits. The Internet veils user identity, with anonymity acting as a form of protection. Weaknesses, flaws and otherness can be concealed or suppressed at the user’s discretion (Zhao, Grasmuck & Martin, 2008). Facebook can also be used to create false identities, as shown in Joost and Schulman’s film Catfish (2011). Even though there is controversy surrounding whether the events documented in the film were true, the documentary still demonstrates how an individual could falsify numerous profiles using the Facebook site. Facebook offers the illusion of authenticity because of the website’s reputation for linking one’s offline social circle on an online platform. Facebook thus appears more credible than Internet chat rooms. The website’s appeal is that the authentic offline self can be readily linked to an idealised self, with artificial connectivity often being misinterpreted for social acting. For instance, a user may appear to have a vast network of Facebook friends, but may only interact with a select few. This creates the assumption that users are often more popular offline than they really are (Zhao, Grasmuck & Martin, 2008).

Arguably, online identities can be perceived as an illusion created by users projecting an idealised self through the omission of information, exaggeration of positive traits or through sheer dishonesty. Online dating users can be divided into two categories; these are namely, users who intend to pursue online dating as a genuine means of meeting a potential mate offline, or users who, for a number of reasons, intend on pursuing an online relationship without physically meeting potential suitors. Toma (2017, p. 427) hypothesised that users who had the intention of meeting potential dates offline tended to portray an online identity that was similar to who they were offline, although somewhat idealised. According to Schubert (2014) users demonstrated an online identity of the “hope-for possible selves” (p. 38), delivering to other users narratives and photographs that represented the best, more culturally desirable parts of them. Schubert’s (2014) study found that users tended to misrepresent how they looked, their age and their marital status more commonly than other traits.

This hypothesis is supported by a study conducted by Tooke and Camire (as cited in Guadagno, Okdie & Kruse, 2012), which found that male users were more deceitful online than their female counterparts. Men attempted to appear kinder, more self-assured and more capable than they were offline. Female users, however, were more deceitful about their appearance, sexuality and femininity. They often portrayed themselves as slimmer, prettier and more sexually adventurous than they were offline (Guadagno, et al., 2012). Women often changed their online identity to suit the preferences of the user they desired as a mate. With such deception prevalent in online identities of those users willing to physically meet with others, it is no surprise that users who were unwilling to date in person often relied on the greater use of deception to fulfill their personal needs (Schubert, 2014). Money scams, deceitful intentions and identity theft are rife in the online dating scene. With a staggering 72% of users convinced that online daters are deceitful, it is astounding that Facebook dating communities are still operational, let alone thriving (Schubert, 2014).

‘Sorry, Not Sorry’: The Benefits of Fluid User Identity when Facebook Dating

Thriving Facebook dating communities are rife with idealised online identities. Tooke and Camire (as cited in Guadagno et al., 2012) discovered that users often idealised their personality and attractiveness to appear more desirable, portraying themselves as more socially acceptable, appealing to cultural beauty standards and gender roles. Often these gender roles are ‘performed’, demonstrated through socially determined behaviour rather than being naturally inherited (Blencowe, 2013). Users of Facebook dating communities, however, can manipulate perceptions of cultural performativity by tailoring their online responses to suit the type of identity they wished to portray, with the option of hiding their biological sex, behaviours or sexuality. Facebook communities also allow the possibility for users to plan responses through text, rather than falling victim to awkward silences in conversation or the Freudian slip. Perhaps this method of communication enables online users to appear more charismatic than they are offline. Individuals can mask their flaws and shed their otherness, experiencing Facebook dating communities as someone culturally desired rather than being overlooked as socially undervalued. These users are aware of these deceptions, moulding their online identity with photograph filters, strategic text and even fabricating untrue information.

These fluid online identities allow users to transcend their social status and experience life as the social elite. For example, a female user could create a Facebook profile using the photographs of an attractive male, limiting use of emotive language and reinforcing cultural norms of masculinity through a voiced love of cars and sports. This user could potentially experience online dating from a male perspective, forming connections with other females for their own personal gain. Online bullying, fraud and ‘Catfishing’ are all rife in Facebook communities, with access to user Facebook profiles acting as a means of learning about potential targets. This reinforces Arora’s study that suggested that some users entertain online connections in fear of committing a “social faux pas”, especially if that user is somehow linked to their social network or claims to reside in their area (as cited in Toma, 2017, p. 425).

Perhaps Facebook dating communities are appealing to users because, aside from interacting with potential love interests, it aids in building a user’s self confidence, allowing for their best or imagined selves to be showcased to the world. It appears that there are little consequences for enhancing or falsifying one’s identity when compared to the reward of adoration and affection received from others. Even users who are in committed relationships can portray that they are single to other potential daters, and even though they may be acting immoral, they may not experience the same guilt as physically cheating on their spouse.

If, like Schubert (2014) suggests, Internet daters thought 72% of users were dishonest with their online identity then why not only interact with users who shared a high disclosure of information about themselves and their lives?

Schubert (2014) found that a low self-disclosure in online dating created the deception of a user being unattainable and therefore more desirable. Other online daters were often more drawn to those low-disclosure users despite an increased chance that a profile with limited information could be misleading. Jameson (1991) could explain this experimentation with risk, through his concept of the “waning of affect” (p. 53). Jameson hypothesised that western culture is bombarded by stimuli, and as a result most are desensitised, constantly searching for emotional and physical stimulation. Perhaps online deception is a means of catering to such a need for stimulation, with the fluidity of online identities providing emotional spikes in both the deceiver and those who are deceived. Rosen, Cheever, Cummings and Felt (2008) contribute to this notion, claiming that those who are deceived by fake online profiles add to their own deception through “Hyperpersonal Perspective”, when “users make overattributions about their online partner” (p. 2129), assigning personal traits they admired, rather than qualities the partner actually had. The relationship between the deceiver and the deceived thus suggests the complexity of human nature and the strong influence of the cultures to which one belongs. These strong cultural influences are reflective in the unique sets of rules followed by individual Facebook dating communities.

Following the Rules: How Fluid Online Identities Benefit Individual Users But Rarely Benefit Facebook Dating Communities

Each individual Facebook dating group has their own unique set of rules. These rules will be used to help establish some general goals of Facebook dating communities and how they advise users to behave in order for that community to reach these goals.

For instance, the Facebook dating community ‘Perth Singles’ attempts to maintain the honesty, safety and privacy of its online members and its group rules reflect these goals. The group’s rules clearly state that users must not advertise goods or services, that members must currently be living as a single person in Western Australia and that users cannot bully each other or post offensive content within the group (Perth Singles, 2016). A fluid online identity, however, could be a threat to this community, rebelling against these community goals without administrators being aware of the deception.

An online identity created within the ‘Perth Singles’ Facebook dating community would benefit the individual user because of its fluidity, but jeopardises the authenticity and goals of the Facebook group itself. Deceptive users would gain access to a vulnerable community protected by a series of ineffective rules created by administrators. For instance, scammers could pose as lonely singles in an attempt to covertly act in fraudulent behaviour, essentially using false profiles as an advertisement to make money. Either changing one’s profile settings, or making them private can easily break the rules relating to geographic location and relationship status. Posting offensive content can be done so through private messaging within the group. Perhaps victimised users could be fearful or embarrassed to report a breach to administrators as it could jeopardise their own idealised online identity within the group. And lastly, bullying can occur through constant access to fake accounts, causing psychological harm to those who discover the deception of a fellow dater’s profile.

Even dating communities that appear more specialised like ‘Perth WA Fitness Singles’ share similar goals, adding that positivity and a fitness lifestyle need to be part of the online identity of each member (Perth WA Fitness Singles, n.d.). Rules such as these encourage identity deception and despite a superficial appearance that these goals are being met, it merely encourages potential members to disguise negative and gluttonous behaviours as a means of interacting with singles who seem to be more culturally desirable because of their physique. Despite the appearance of these rules being maintained within a Facebook dating community, the fluidity of online identity seems to benefit the individual user and not the groups to which they belong. Perhaps further research can be conducted to see if more rules in an online community either deter or encourage deceptive users.

Conclusion

Deception is rife online. Facebook’s dating communities are affected by dishonest user identities. The website’s vast accessibility, global scale, free access and appearance of equality make the platform appealing to both genuine and deceptive Internet daters. Weaknesses and flaws can be concealed in many ways; through photo filters, omission of information and strategic editing. Despite knowing the risks of deception, online daters still choose to engage with Facebook communities, relying on ineffective group rules to weed out undesirables. Internet daters seem willing to suspend their belief of an authentic online reality, a reality of waning affect. Deceptions in online dating appear to engage users by appealing to a human need for excitement, lust and passion, rather than prioritising honesty and integrity in their courtships.

References

Blencowe, C. (2013). Performativity. In M. Evans & C. J. Williams (eds.) Gender: The Key Concepts (pp. 162-169). Abingdon: Routledge.

Guadagno, R., Okdie, B. & Kruse, S. (2012). Dating deception: Gender, online dating, and exaggerated self-presentation. Computers in human behavior, 28, 642-647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.010

Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. London & New York: Verso.

Joost, H. (Producer), & Schulman, A. (Director). (2011). Catfish [Motion Picture]. United States: Universal.

Perth Singles. (2016). In Facebook [Group page]. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from https://www.facebook.com/groups/perthsingles/

Perth WA Fitness Singles (n.d.). In Facebook [Group page]. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from https://www.facebook.com/groups/197658607383711/?ref=br_rs

Rosen, L., Cheever, N., Cummings, C. & Felt, J. (2008) The impact of emotionality and self-disclosure on online dating versus traditional dating. Computers in human behavior, 24, 2124-2157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.10.003

Schubert, K. (2014) Internet dating and “doing gender”: An analysis of women’s experiences dating online. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved April 1, 2018, from http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0046620/00001

Toma, C. L. (2017). Developing online deception literacy while looking for love. Media, Culture and Society, 39 (3), 423-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0163443716681660

Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S. & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in human behavior, 24, 1816-1836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012

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