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.

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

Rachel M.Winship

Curtin University

Abstract

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

Introduction

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

LiveJournal and the history of blogging

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

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

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

Dear Diary: Community and LiveJournal

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

Identity and anonymity debate

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

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

Trolling and doxing

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

Conclusion

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reference List

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 4^th 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

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.

Contentious Conversations: Race, Religion and Participation Within the New Media Landscape

James Manson. May 2018.

Abstract

The ubiquity of the internet and subsequent convergence of technology and culture, combined with the functionality of social media has allowed for new media technologies to be utilised by indigenous and marginalised communities as an effective mode of communication that crosses several cultural, geographic and political lines. Social media has the capacity to democratise and empower users but also to homogenise and pervert understandings depending on its uses. This study has identified that the discussions surrounding issues dealing with indigenous and marginalised communities in Australia are not only proliferated within these communities themselves, but people are often mobilised in response to various crises and citizen reports. This uncovered an interesting mechanism whereby uninvolved agents within various political communities and special interest groups hijacked these issues surrounding indigenous and marginalised peoples, in order to, promote a loosely related agenda. Politics, power, fear, left vs right-wing politics, political correctness and human rights are identified as often at the heart of these discussions and require a discerning eye when navigating social media.

Keywords: Indigenous Communities Online, Social Media, Participatory Culture, Citizen Journalism, Social Capital.

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Continue reading Contentious Conversations: Race, Religion and Participation Within the New Media Landscape

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.

Competitive FPS communities; An analysis of the types of communication that occurs in the third place and the emergence of esports in mainstream society

Abstract

Communities play an important role in acknowledging different groups of people who have similar interests. Within these communities, candidates facilitate different methods of communication with applications, evident through the progression in new emergent technologies. This paper first explores the concept of ‘third place’. It then reviews the concept of online games, delving into the specific First-Person Shooter (FPS) community. From here, a precedence for online games is established. The paper then caters towards discussing how online games become competitive through the realm of ‘esports’. Various contemporary examples of ‘esports’ competitions will be looked upon from game titles such as Overwatch and Call of Duty. Each game provides various types of communication, aiding gamers within a competitive environment. Finally, I will transition to the importance of communication in offline events whilst looking at the proliferation of ‘esports’ becoming more evident in contemporary society for viewers as well as players who participate.

Introduction

Over the years, online games have provided an avenue for a variety of people to escape realism and pressures of the ‘real world’. These spaces are often considered as separate to those experienced in real life, donned as a ‘third place’. Soukup (2006) explores the research of sociologist Ray Oldenburg to which identifies the Third Place as “public spaces used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace”. Oldenburg specifies the characteristics of these spaces which are a good starting point in identifying and providing a discussion around this community. From Soukup (2006), he argues that third places:

Are on neutral ground;
Are a leveller;
Conversation is the main activity;
Are accessible;
[Are a] home away from home, they have ‘regulars’; and
[Have a playful mood]

‘Third place’ is situated and considered as an extension of ordinary life. In this paper, I’ll be identifying online games within this space, specifically First-Person Shooters (FPS’). The online gaming community is far too big to identify; therefore, the main scope of this paper will primarily cater towards this specific niche in the gaming community. For those that are unaware, the competitive environment is currently on the rise and is referred to nowadays as ‘esports’. Seo and Jung (2014) explore this as “an area of sport activities in which people develop and train mental or physical abilities in the use of information and communication technologies”. Expanding media platforms have promoted this ever-changing phenomenon with it becoming more than just an activity but rather a more inclusive participative activity through spectatorship. With its rapid increase in popularity, “online computer gaming leagues and locally networked events have offered players a place to engage in serious or career competition” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.636). With ‘esports’ occurring both online and in offline settings, communication between players is vital to achieve success. This paper will investigate the FPS community and how it creates a competitive environment and promotes a larger level of communication within the third place. Examples such as Overwatch and Call of Duty will be discussed regarding online and offline settings to further explore the notion of a competitive environment. Finally, I will look at communication at ‘LAN’ events and its importance in an offline environment whilst pursuing the ideal of ‘esports’ and its relevance in contemporary society through its growth through viewership and participation of ‘esport’ ‘athletes’.

Third Place and its relationship with Online Games

As previously mentioned, scholars such as Oldenburg have defined ‘third place’ as a “public space[s] used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace” (Soukup, 2006, p. 421). Contrasting from what’s usually considered as ‘normal life’, video games offers further social interaction and a platform whereby consumers can escape from reality. According to Wadley et al. (2003) companies such as Sony and Microsoft were the first of many to pioneer this. It is said that “Sony and Microsoft appear to have similar visions for online console gaming: a global network connecting millions of users, who not only play videogames with each other, but also socialise online” (Wadley et al., 2003, p.238).

Online games come in many different forms, whether it’s through multiplayer against other individuals, or cooperative play whereby players team up with others to perform a certain set of tasks. ‘Third places’ are often regarded to be on ‘neutral ground’ and are ‘accessible’. However, in some cases this is not always possible. With a gap in technology, not all people have access to platforms whereby third places occur, in this case, online games. Scholar Papacarissi argues that “the fact that online technologies are only accessible to and used by, a small fraction of the population contributes to an electronic public sphere that is exclusive, elitist and far from the ideal” (Soukup, 2006, p.430). The ‘leveler’ and ‘accessibility’ arguments that are initially enforced by Oldenburg are under scrutiny, conflicting with the ideal of being available to all.

While this seems to be the case, ‘social capital’ helps to support Oldenburg’s views. Robert Putnam defines social capital to be the “connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness arise from them” (Soukup, 2006, p.430). Moreover, while “connectedness might foster equality, it is not necessarily ‘distributed’ evenly…not all people are equally connected with other members of their communities” (Soukup, 2006, p.430). In the case of online games, it provides members a platform to communicate and to meet others, but in some cases, not evenly. The significance of the third place and online games offer and “provide greater opportuni[ties] for diverse people to acquire social capital” (Soukup, 2006, pp. 430-431) as an extension from daily life.

How do Online Games become Competitive? The concept of ‘Esports’ and its rise within contemporary society

An aspect of online games that has become profoundly more popular over the years is the concept of ‘esports’ or more commonly referred to as ‘competitive video games’. Seo and Jung (2014) explain its concept with the ideal being based around “the emergence of professional and semi-professional tournaments, where consumers have been able to celebrate organised and competitive gaming practices”. It’s progression has seen the creation of “leagues and locally networked events [which] have offered players a place to engage in serious or career competition” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.636). Industry body Electronic Sports League (ESL) reported that in 2012 there were “3.6 million registered users in Europe” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.642). South Korea has been regarded as the hub of ‘esports’ for many years. In its early stages there were “more than 430 professional ‘athletes’ in South Korea who make a living from playing computer games, and the 2013 WCG – an ‘eSports’ tournament comparable to the Olympic Games for traditional sports – saw 400 computer game players attend from 40 different countries” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.642). The scalability of this phenomenon is quite remarkable. Team-based titles such as Overwatch and Call of Duty are that of which are subject to current competitions produced on global level with the Overwatch League as well as the Call of Duty World League. At the highest level, and even in online matches, communication is an important aspect that can influence the sequence and result of events in-game. Next, it’ll be critical to analyse the types of communication each title makes use of, showing its relevance and how it helps gamers in a competing environment.

Types of Communication experienced within an Online setting

Text Communication vs. Voice Communication – and the addition of non-verbal in-game tools

Fig 1. Overwatch in-game text-based chat channels between team members (blue) and everyone in the match (orange). (Overwatch Chat, 2016).

Overwatch utilises different modes of communication, the first being text oriented. Players can communicate with their teammates using in-game tools such as ‘pinging’ which notifies their team when their abilities will be available. Following this, gamers can also initiate text-based conversations with their team. Figure 1 shows an example of the text chat in action. The players highlighted with the orange text display their disliking towards a players skill within their match. On the other hand, players are also able to communicate via the voice chat system. This is by far the more preferred way of communicating with team members being able to co-ordinate strategies and plays much more efficiently. The ‘competitive’ playlist is a place where the nature and testing of skill is created through Overwatch. Players are presented with a rank based on how they play against one another. A change in rank or ‘skill rating’ (SR) is a result of either winning or losing a match. Levels of communication are therefore required to be very efficient for teams to focus on obtaining specific objectives or eliminating the appropriate targets. Online games that offer something at stake or worth playing for creates value and frames the game as being competitive. To be successful in this environment, communication plays a pivotal role in crafting the way a team plays as well as adjusting to situations as they happen.

Types of Communication experienced through offline events – competing in a ‘LAN’ environment

Communication is not only conducted in an online setting but also through an offline environment at events or more commonly known as ‘LANs’ (Local Area Network). A LAN is a social event whereby “gamers link their PCs…in order to play together” (Jansz & Martens, 2005, p.335). This social setting is very common for those participating in ‘esports’ with major competitions hosted in this environment. The example makes mention to PCs being linked but console games, such as Call of Duty and Halo, have also been subject to LAN events over the years. LAN events commonly offer something tangible for those who win. The offline setting of LAN events creates a different essence of competitiveness. Communication plays a very important role at LAN events with so much more at stake in comparison to an online setting. Previously, I mentioned that communication was used to co-ordinate specific plays by teams to win in certain situations. Communication is much different in this environment with many gamers often subject to performance anxiety or lack of communication under a much stressful setting.

The tangibility of the prize money, trophy, as well as non-tangible aspects such as reputation is something often creates a competitive environment amongst gamers. Tangibility creates a drive “to win or surpass others…to accomplish levels that one’s friends cannot” (Jansz & Martens, 2005, p.337). Winning an event or any competition for that matter enables gamers to hold a reputation over others that haven’t completed the same feat; this is one of the main drivers that promotes competitiveness in an offline setting. Gamers such as those from OpTic Gaming would have been inclined to use a high level of communication between one another for processes in-game to be a lot more effective, and as a result, helped them to successfully win the tournament. Therefore, LAN events are an amalgamation of both online games as well as a social space for competitive gamers. For what was once regarded as a ‘third place’, this is one of the many concepts that are starting to blur the lines of becoming a much more evident part of the ‘real world’.

‘Esports’ viewership rivalling that of traditional sports and the future for ‘esport’ ‘athletes’

The viewership of traditional sports in comparison to that which is generated from ‘esports’ is something quite interesting. With the introduction of streaming platforms, such as Twitch and YouTube, it has lessened the barriers of entry into the realm of esports. According to Lack (2017) “Streaming platforms like Twitch (launched 2011) acted as growth catalysts for eSports”. Moreover, these platforms “provided the stage for tens of millions of viewers to watch their favourite teams and players live without traveling from their bedrooms. In doing so, they have allowed audience numbers to compete, and even outcompete, with traditional sporting competitions” (Lack, 2017).

Fig 3. Shows the finals viewership comparing NBA and MLB finals against the finals for League of Legends on the streaming platform Twitch. (Lack, 2017)

Viewership of ‘esports’ online can also be replicated in an offline setting at live events. One of the prime examples of this was at the League of Legends World Championship Final in Seoul, South Korea. It was said that “40,000 fans crowded…where huge opening and closing ceremonies featured bands like Imagine Dragons” (Lack, 2017). The viewership of ‘esports’ has transcended from preceding years. Twitch has pioneered a movement allowing for everyday consumers to delve into the concept of ‘esports’ online. The growth rate of the industry is remarkable with “Corporate sponsorship, audiences, and prize funds start[ing] to grow at a rapid rate” (Lack, 2017). Not only this, but “tournament regularity; from the year 2000 to the year 2010, the annual frequency of tournaments increased by 2600%” (Lack, 2017). The progression of this phenomenon is something that needs to be taken seriously with games like Dota 2 which has “awarded little short of $90,000,000 in prizes, with $20,000,000 given out in one tournament alone” (Lack, 2017). Following this even “Colleges and universities are cultivating ‘eSports’ teams” (Lack, 2017). For people that show a high interest in this field, one that was considered traditionally to be a hobby, can now look at ‘esports’ in a way that blends into ‘contemporary’ life as possible job prospects.

Limitations

There are a few limitations that need to be considered regards to the contents discussed in this paper. These include:

The scalability of Online Games. The online gaming community is far too broad to explore for the sake of this paper. The research conducted is only limited to that of the First-Person Shooter community and does not make many ties to extended gaming genres.

Examples identified. The examples of Overwatch and Call of Duty only offer a small insight into the realm of ‘esports’ and shouldn’t be reflective of the whole industry.

Accuracy of statistics. The statistics regarding ‘esports’ viewership should be reviewed more closely from various sources and should not be regarded as an accurate representation unless reflected in similar cases.

Conclusion

In summary, Online Games offer a range of benefits towards consumers exposed to its many intricacies. For many, games are a part of a third place which is identified by Soukup (2006) as “public spaces used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace”. Games within a third place offer an increased level of social capital as people learn to create relationships and form friends as an extension of everyday life. However, it must be noted that not all consumers have access to such technologies, making it somewhat exclusive. There’s also an aspect whereby games become competitive. I explained the concept of ‘esports’ and how competitiveness is stemmed contrasting to casual play amongst consumers. For those seeking to succeed in such a diverse and competitive environment the use of communication is vital. From here, the methods of communication experienced in First-Person Shooter titles are referred to, ultimately aiding gamers perform their best competitively. The paper transitioned to communication at ‘LAN’ events and how it differs from its online counterpart. Finally, the concept of ‘esports’ events from a viewership perspective are explored and how it’s becoming more evident as a part of contemporary society with an increase in esports tournaments online and at live events; ultimately rivalling those of traditional sports.

References

Fletcher, A. (2018). Top 5 Largest Esports Games & Their Prize Pools. Retrieved from
http://www.xygaming.com/content/top-5-largest-esports-games-prize-pools/

Jansz, J., & Martens, L., (2005). Gaming at a LAN event: the social context of playing video games. New Media & Society, 7(3), 333-355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444805052280

Lack, A. (2017). A Comprehensive History of Esports. The Good, The Bad, and The Atari 1976 Space Invaders Tournament [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.adspreemedia.com/blog/comprehensive-history-esports-good-bad-and-atari-1976-space-invaders-tournament

Overwatch Chat. (2016). Chat Example. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/overwatch_chat/status/773348692640227328

Seo, Y. & Jung, S-U. (2014). Beyond solitary play in computer games: The social practices of eSports. Journal of Consumer Culture, 16(3), 635-655. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540514553711

Soukup, C. (2006). Computer-mediated communication as a virtual third place: building Oldenburg’s great good places on the world wide web. New Media & Society, 8(3), 421-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444806061953

Wadley, G., Gibbs, M., Hew, K., & Graham, C. (2003). Computer supported cooperative play, “third places” and online videogames. In S. Viller and P. Wyeth (Eds.), Proceedings 2003 Australasian Computer Human Interaction Conference (OzCHI 2003), Ergonomics Society of Australia, Canberra. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Gibbs3/publication/251747173_Computer_Supported_Cooperative_Play_Third_Places_and_Online_Videogames/links/5625617c08aed3d3f137129f.pdf

The social media movement: The creation of online and offline communities using social media in the Black Lives Matter Movement.

Jessica Petrides

THE SOCIAL MEDIA MOVEMENT

Abstract

This paper explores the use of social media platform Twitter and its ability to create strong communities online, which are then taken offline to enact change. I will examine what determines a virtual community and the factors that contribute to creating a strong virtual community. Building on this, I will explore how virtual communities have to capacity to transcends to that of one which also exists offline. This paper will use the Black Lives Matter movement as an example to demonstrate the way in which the online activist movement also created an offline movement by organising protests, rallies and boycotts.

Keywords: Black Lives Matter, social media, online communities, Twitter.

THE SOCIAL MEDIA MOVEMENT

Social networking sites (SNS’s) have the ability to connect a wide range of demographics, from all over the world, to form online communities. These virtual communities can be used to spread awareness, create support systems, facilitate relationships and generate strong-ties between users (Porter, 2015). These virtual communities also have the capacity to transfer to offline communities. An example of this is Black Lives Matter, an originally online community which has become an offline movement. The movement, which utilises the social media platform Twitter, fights to spread awareness against racial disparity in America, and was created following unfortunate events of mistreatment to African Americans. Originally starting as a hashtag (#blacklivesmatter), the movement transformed into on ground protests, boycotts and rallies right around America. By delving deeper into both the online and offline communities that Black Lives Matter has created, I will be exploring how SNS’s have the capability to go further than just virtual interaction, and its ability to spread awareness and form communities that gather face-to-face in the world to achieve a shared goal.

Social media communities and the Black Lives Matter movement

Porter (2015) describes virtual communities as passion-centric, where the focal point of the communication by individuals is a shared interest and the interaction of this is supported by technology. To build a strong virtual community there are a set of factors which create its foundations. These factors include a fulfilment of needs, shared emotional connection between members and a sense of belonging (Hersberger, Murray, & Rioux, 2007). Because of these foundations, the assumption for a well maintained community should include content and support which reaches its member’s expectations, be engaging and act in solidarity. As Forman, Kern, and Gil-Egui (2012) discuss, the fulfilment of needs, shared emotional connection and sense of belonging, are all factors which can be achieved in both virtual and face-to-face communities. This provides a transition from virtual community to face-to-face, and vice versa, to be that of a smooth one. Virtual communities forming on social media websites can be said to be split into two groups, computer supported social networks (CSSNs) and the other, a network-based virtual community (Porter, 2015). CSSNs cover users who only communicate over computers and have the potential to have strong, moderate or weak ties. The second, network-based virtual communities, covers those individuals who are geographically dispersed where members seek social benefits (Porter, 2015). The creation of these online communities can be performed through gaming, chat rooms and social media. With the ease of access to social media, it can be utilised as a space to gather, communicate and discuss issues. This can be seen on Twitter, which now amasses over 330 million users worldwide (Statista, 2018). The creation of online communities assisted in creating a large and ongoing civil movement in the United States of America. The Black Lives Matter movement began in 2013, as a response to George Zimmerman’s acquittal of the shooting and killing of unarmed, 17 year old, African American, Trayvon Martin. Created by Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi, three African American women who were united together in their stance to form a revolutionary peace movement, the term Black Lives Matter was created. The purpose of their movement was to, and to this day still is to, affirm African Americans humanity, contributions to society and resilience in the face of deadly oppression, as they wish to live in a world where black lives are no longer targeted for demise (“Herstory,” 2013). The movement is strong and powerful and truly took off in 2014, when protests commenced in Ferguson, Missouri, following the shooting and killing of Michael Brown, who was once again an unarmed, African American, teenager. Brown’s death by a white police officer gained a large amount of traction on Twitter, with the Black Lives Matter hashtag being tweeted about on an average of 58,747 times per day for three weeks after Michael Brown’s death (Anderson & Hitlin, 2016). The large amount of media coverage and response to this incident brought to light topics of national debate including race, rights and gun control. From these unfortunate events, and many others since (“Timeline: The Black Lives Matter movement,” 2018), the Black Lives Matter virtual community was born, and was used as a platform and tool to organise on-ground events for communities to engage in this social activism in person.

How Black Lives Matter created an online community

Black Lives Matter, which originally began as a hashtag on Facebook (#Blacklivesmatter), transcended into an extremely popular and widespread Twitter movement. It created a large community of users and from the movement entered a recognisable community, with its own agenda and identity, to end racial disparity and police brutality (Freelon, McIlwain, & Clark, 2016). Twitter emerged as a platform where users shared stories, found common ground in their concern of the events occurring and together were fighting for reform (De Choudhury, Jhaver, Sugar, & Weber, 2016). Millions of users expressed their concerns over brutality, and a recognisable community with its own agenda and identity formed (Freelon et al., 2016). This growing community utilised multiple hashtags, as shown in Table 1 in the appendix. With over 21 million tweets regarding the Ferguson riots, and over 9 million regarding the killing of Michael Brown. Millions of tweets including the names of other victims of police brutality were also posted. Members of this community were fighting give a voice to those who could no longer speak for themselves. Amongst the millions of tweets displayed in appendix one, De Choudhury et al. (2016) discovered that users with high participation in the movement rarely expressed high levels of negativity or anger in their posts. They were determined to fight for change, as a calm collective. They were firm in their stance to organise action and were socially connecting, supporting, coping and engaging with each other as a community (De Choudhury et al., 2016). The online community grew so rapidly in size, that these users had the capacity to spread news of any brutality and issues regarding the movement faster than mainstream media (Miners, 2014). Adding to this, Patterson (2016) found that the community associated with Black Lives Matter was larger than any communities that were associated with mainstream media outlets. This formed a powerful community that had the ability to be well-informed and knowledgeable and was able to control the speed of information dispersed. As Freelon et al. (2016) discusses, supportive communities consistently attract more attention than those that are unaligned or opposed, and the Black Lives Matter movement who involved users rallying together so their voices could be heard and their desire for change further discussed, is a prime example of this. Twitter support from celebrities including Lebron James, Kim Kardashian West and Lady Gaga among many more, expanded the movements reach even further (James, 2016; Kardashian West, 2016; Gaga, 2016). With celebrities having a reach of millions on Twitter, this type of traction on the issue assisted in the movements capacity to those outside of the community of the issues at hand.

How Black Lives Matter created an offline community.

From reaching millions to create a virtual community on Twitter, the Black Lives Matter movement also adapted to on-ground communities right around America. Using Twitter as the main platform, it was able to facilitate the organisation of Black Lives Matter protests, boycotts and rallies. The organisation of these demonstrations were not just completed by the founders of the movement, but were done by many individuals and other organisations who shared the same goals. From July 2014 to March 2018, over 2300 protests or other demonstrations were held in support of this movement . Some protests attracted thousands and lasted for days, the biggest, and most covered by the media being the Ferguson protests which attracted a great amount of worldwide media attention. Community members who were on-ground at the protests, continued to update members of the community who were unable to make the Ferguson protests due to geographical location (Freelon et al., 2016). DeRay McKesson was one of these community members who live-tweeted his experience at the protests. This total amount of retweets and mentions of the brutality that was displayed at the protests amassed to 1 million (Freelon et al., 2016). With people from around the world seeing what this community was capable of arranging, the protests not only become widespread throughout the United States, they also became international and continued to attract thousands, with solidarity marches held in Manchester, London, Birmingham and Bristol (Pidd, 2016). On-ground support of the movement was also demonstrated by celebrities who had originally expressed their support of the campaign via Twitter. Celebrity husband and wife duo John Legend and Chrissy Tiegen hired several food trucks to serve free food to those protesting the movement in New York, Jay Z and Beyonce hosted a charity ball where they raised $1.5 million to donate to social justice groups including Black Lives Matter, four NBA players delivered a speech at the opening of the 2016 ESPY (Excellence in Sports Performance Yearly) Awards where they brought to light their strong support of the Black Lives Matter movement and actor Jesse Williams produced a documentary titled ‘Stay Woke: The Black Lives Matter Movement’ (Price, 2016). This transition to what once began as a hashtag, to millions worth of donations, a documentary and people demanding action on-ground, is a true testament to what a Twitter movement has the capability to do.

Conclusion

As shown above in the Black Lives Matter movement, strong virtual communities have the ability to become offline communities. Virtual communities with strong foundations and a clear purpose as discussed by have similar characteristics to traditional communities, and therefore can be both online and offline. Twitter gave the Black Lives Matter movement a global audience and the employment of this social media form gave way for Twitter users to also become a part of on-ground activism rather than just online activism. The sheer magnitude of protests, boycotts, rallies and media attention the movement received is a testament to this. Although it is impossible to measure if the movement would have been as influential without the Twitter movement, I believe it would not have gained the vast amount of traction and support that is has, and still does.

Appendix:

Table 1: Retrieved from “Beyond the Hashtags: #Ferguson, #Blacklivesmatter, and the Online Struggles for Offline Justice,” by D. Freelon, C. D. Mcllwain, and M. D. Clark, 2016.

References:

Anderson, M., & Hitlin, P. (2016). The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter emerges social activism on Twitter. Social Media Conversations About Race. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/08/15/the-hashtag-blacklivesmatter-emerges-social-activism-on-twitter/#

At least 2,356 Black Lives Matter protests and other demonstrations have been held in the past 1,353 days. (2018). Retrieved from https://elephrame.com/textbook/BLM

De Choudhury, M., Jhaver, S., Sugar, B., & Weber, I. (2016). Social Media Participation in an Activist Movement for Racial Equality. Proceedings of the … International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 2016, 92-101.

Forman, A. E., Kern, R., & Gil-Egui, G. (2012). Death and mourning as sources of community participation in online social networks: R.I.P. pages in Facebook. 2012. doi:10.5210/fm.v0i0.3935

Freelon, D., McIlwain, C. D., & Clark, M. D. (2016). Beyond the Hashtags: #Ferguson, #Blacklivesmatter, and the Online Struggle for Offline Justice.

Gaga, Lady. (2016, August 7). Paul O’neal…[Tweet]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/ladygaga/status/762381066682273792?lang=en

Hersberger, J. A., Murray, A. L., & Rioux, K. S. (2007). Examining information exchange and virtual communities: an emergent framework. Online Information Review, 31(2), 135-147. doi:10.1108/14684520710747194

Herstory. (2013). Black Lives Matter. Retrieved from https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/herstory/

James, L. (2016, July 7). This article says it all…[Tweet]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/kingjames/status/751234227836841989

Kardashian West, K. (2016, July 8). BLACK LIVES MATTER [Tweet]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/kimkardashian/status/751430737304252416?lang=en

Miners, Z. (2014). Analysis of Ferguson tweets shows Twitter’s quick grip on the news. Retrieved from PCWorld website: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2540140/analysis-of-tweets-around-ferguson-shows-twitters-quick-grip-on-the-news.html

Patterson, B. E. (2016). Black Lives Matter is Killing it on Twitter. Retrieved from Mother Jones website: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/study-shows-how-black-lives-matter-controls-police-narrative/

Pidd, H. (2016). Thousands attend Black Lives Matter solidarity march in Manchester. Retrieved from The Guardian website: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/11/black-lives-matter-solidarity-march-protest-manchester

Porter, C. E. (2015). Virtual communities and social networks. In L. Cantoni & J. A. Danowski (Eds.), Communication and technology (Vol. 5, pp. 161-179): Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.

Price, L. (2016). How Celebrities have Supported Black Lives Matter. Retrieved from People Celebrity website: http://people.com/celebrity/how-celebrities-have-supported-black-lives-matter/#the-weeknd

Statista. (2018). Number of monthly active Twitter users worldwide from 1st quarter 2010 to 4th quarter 2017 (in millions). Retrieved from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/282087/number-of-monthly-active-twitter-users/

Timeline: The Black Lives Matter movement. (2018). Retrieved from ABC News website: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-14/black-lives-matter-timeline/7585856

PDF Download

This work by Jessica Petrides is licensed under a: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License