Meryl\nProost<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Curtin\nUniversity<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This paper looks at the properties of Facebook Groups and how this online platform can facilitate an enriched community experience.\u00a0 It examines three examples of Facebook Groups which have used this platform to enrich their own communities, Chat 10 Looks 3, Mums n’ Bubs \u2013 Logan and United Patriots Front.\u00a0 This paper details the establishment of the Groups, the motivation of members to join and gives examples of the altruistic nature of the first two Groups and examples of the far-right political activist motivation behind the latter Group. This paper discusses the academic theories behind the relative success of these three groups.\u00a0 <\/p>\n\n\n\n Keywords<\/em>: Facebook Groups, communities Facebook Groups Enrich the Community Experience<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The application for Closed Groups on the social media platform Facebook can facilitate an enriched community experience for community groups by maintaining regular controlled contact, discussion, advice and support. Our participation in online communities adds value to our community experience and complements our offline communities, maintaining relationships with our family and friends daily and occasionally meeting up in person with members of our online communities. Most Facebook Groups begin as information pages and have evolved into altruistic communities leading on occasion to their members\/users\/content producers to connect and form offline communities. Concurrently, offline communities, which were initiated in person, now use social media to stay connected, distribute information and share experiences, photos, news stories and videos. This paper will examine the Closed Facebook Groups Chat 10 Looks 3, Mums N Bubs \u2013 Logan and United Patriots Front, their establishment, motivation, administration and members. These and other Closed Facebook Groups enrich the community experience providing ambient intimacy, social expectation, identity and community cooperation between their members. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The social media platform\nFacebook launched in May 2007. Within\nthe platform is an application for Closed Groups (Facebook, 2007). These groups\nare usually administrated by an individual or group of organised members who\nset the guidelines, rules and terms of entry for the group. Members of the public must apply to be added\nto the group or suggested by existing members. \nThis application has evolved into a valuable tool for many community\ngroups, those initiated online and offline. \nThe function of Closed Facebook Groups is a computer mediated communication\n(CMC) platform, defined as \u201cgroups of people\nwith common interests and practices that communicate regularly and for some\nduration, in an organized way over the Internet through a common location or\nmechanism\u201d (Ridings & Gefen, 2004, p. 3). \nThe Notifications feature of Facebook Groups allows\nmembers to be digitally notified each time a member has uploaded a new\npost. Reichelt terms this constant and\nimmediate interaction as \u201cambient intimacy\u201d, this is where you are \u201cable to keep\nin touch with people with a level of regularity and intimacy that you wouldn\u2019t\nusually have access to, because time and space conspire to make it impossible\u201d\n(Disambiguity, 2007). While Facebook Group \u201cNotifications\u201d enables the members\nof one group to constantly keep others updated with intimate details of their\nfamily life, eating or reading habits, work or gardening problems; those in\nanother group may keep in touch constantly monitoring news stories, political\nrallies, blogging hate crimes or the like. A study focusing on the motivation\nfor engaging in such groups found the factors to be based on social\nexpectation, similar to those in real life communities. Members of these groups follow the rules of engagement\nas set up by the administrators and share as per the social norm within the\ngroup (Pi, Chou, & Liao, 2013, p. 1976).<\/p>\n\n\n\n One Closed\nFacebook Group began with the podcast Chat 10 Looks 3, hosted by journalists Leigh\nSales and Annabel Crabb. The Facebook Group, of the same name, is for fans of\nthe podcast to communicate. Just as the\npodcast is a forum for friends to \u201cdiscuss what they\u2019re\nreading, watching, cooking, listening to or irrationally exhilarated by\u201d (Chat10Looks3,\nn.d.), so is the Closed Facebook Group forum of 33,000 or so members. Fans of the podcast are vetted by\nadministrators and then given permission to join the group. Through the several\nyears since the Facebook Group\u2019s incarnation a language has evolved with terms\nlike \u201cthe Brendalings\u201d, meaning the administrators of the Facebook Group and \u201cSmug\nBundt\u201d, regular postings of members proud cooking achievements. The members\ncall themselves Chatters now, have a\nsignature pin (blue fairy wren), a signature recipe (Crack) and a mascot dog (Momo). All of these signifiers bond the community. Donath, when referring to online gamers, discusses\nhow a \u201clanguage is an important indication of group identity\u201d, it applies\nequally in this instance where language can be used just as accurately as the blue\nfairy wren pin to denote membership and inclusion. Donath likens it to moving to a new community\nand adopting the accent (1999, p. 8). Tales of help and support for relative strangers abound\nwithin this community such as one member collecting another\u2019s father and taking\nhim to a play, one offering a bed to another\u2019s daughter stuck in London,\nseveral turning up at a country hospital to offer cabbage leaves and support\nfor a breast cancer patient and fellow member. \nOne comment on a Facebook Group post by Leigh Sales says \u201cwhat makes CH10L3\nspecial is that there is always someone else who\u2019s going through the same thing\nyou are and you can support each other through it\u201d (Hunter, 2018). The repeated and varied actions of\nindividuals reinforcing and reflecting the community\u2019s altruistic identity and\ntherefore reinforcing every member\u2019s individual identity by being part of the community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cambient intimacy\u201d, mentioned\nearlier, allows for meet ups to be easier as the members feel as if they\nalready know each other. <\/strong>Sandry, based\non Emmanuel Levinas\u2019 1969 work, poses that the face we show via CMC could be\nbroadly translated as any aspect of our personality or self we chose to reveal\n(2014, p.6). This brings a modern, working\nmeaning to term \u201cFace to Face\u201d when referring to our online communities. Thompson\u2019s New Yorker article also\ndiscusses ambient awareness or \u201cambient intimacy\u201d as being very similar to\nphysically knowing a close family member, their mannerisms, speech patterns or\nsighs (2008). Thompson explores a theory\nwhen asking why we feel so comfortable with this level of community intimacy\nand poses that this intimacy has been historically normal in village\ncommunities and the relatively \u201cprivate\u201d post-industrial revolution is the\nanomaly (2008). This kind of ambient intimacy\nleads Facebook Group members to turn up unannounced at a hospital bed with\nphysical and emotional support for a fellow member previously unknown to them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mums N Bubs – Logan is a Closed\nFacebook Group of 22,000 or so members. This organisation began outside of Facebook when\nLogan mother, Natalie Millar, saw a need for a community for young mothers\nwithin the district of Logan City, a local government area situated between\nBrisbane and the Gold Coast. The region\nof Logan contains a population with an incredibly ethnically diverse population\nof a generally young, low socio-economic profile. Millar began the group using\nemail but needed an easier way to communicate with the rapidly growing group. After one and half years, Millar felt a Closed\nFacebook Group was the best available choice to facilitate this community, using\nit to announce meetings, provide support and resources. Millar says the central feature of the group\nis the weekly offline meet ups in parks and playgrounds, however the Facebook\nGroup has evolved into a 24-hour, seven day a week \u201chelp and support forum\u201d\n(Millar, 2018). The group has grown from\nits offline, local region, to include international members in New Zealand and\nGhana. Millar claims that at\nall times members are altruistic in their behaviour. When a parent reaches out it can be for\nvaried reasons such as help with parenting questions or problems, family\ntragedies, help with government paperwork, medical issues, economic issues,\nmental health or social disorders. \nThrough the Facebook Group the responses from fellow members flood in\nwith offers of help and support, Millar reviews all responses and edits\naccording to what is appropriate and seeks professional advice when necessary. Millar has recently been headhunted by the\nLocal Government body to consult on the needs of the region to enrich\ncommunity, based on information learned through the Closed Facebook Group\n(Millar, 2018). The data collected and\nskills learned through her Closed Facebook Group has been useful to Local\nGovernment as the online forum reflects the real-life geographic community and\nhighlights its needs. Mums N Bubs \u2013\nLogan will potentially enrich not only the online community but also the geographic\ncommunity of Logan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These two previous examples\nhighlight the altruistic nature of online communities when the initial\nmotivation for members is altruism. \nRecent world events would suggest social media is also being used to\nenrich certain kinds of communities not so altruistic in nature. An example of this is the Christchurch Mosque\nshootings on March 15, this year. ABC\u2019s\nFour Corners program (Under the Radar) has highlighted the widespread use of social\nmedia within, not only Muslim Terror organisations, but also with far-right\nWhite Supremacy movements. The program\nrevealed how the accused shooter was a member and contributor to a, now\ndeleted, Closed Facebook Group, United Patriots Front, which boasted over\n100,000 members. The Mosque shooting was streamed live, by the accused, on Facebook. As Four Corners pointed out, social media\u2019s\nkey features make it a perfect tool for enabling such activities as it is a one\nto many platform, users can be anonymous, it is cheap and it is instant (Rubinsztein-Dunlop,\n2019). One purpose for anonymity online is to express\nparts of your personality you may choose to hide from your offline\/general\nfriend network or work colleagues. The Closed Facebook Group space allows the\nmember to \u201creveal through their posts to the group wall, different aspects of their\npersonality from those which they chose to share more generally with their\nFacebook friend network\u201d (Sandry, 2014, p.3). \nLeader of United Patriots Front and its companion Facebook Group, Blair\nCottrell stated on social media when referring to the establishment of real-life\nclubhouses \u201c\u2026 we need a real community\u201d, \u201che was building a community, a\nphysical network of people on social media\u201d (Devlin, 2018). Blair Cottrell was enriching his community\nthrough the use of Facebook Groups with a more troublesome motivation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n When exploring the reasons for the\neffectiveness Facebook Groups building and enriching community experience, one\ncan look to the social media research theory of \u201cstrength in weak cooperation\u201d\n(Aguiton & Cardon, 2007, p. 51). According to this theory, the connection between\nusers or members of a Closed Facebook Group may be weak, they may only have a\ncouple of points of reference in common, however, what makes this \u201cweak\ncooperation\u201d strong is the \u201cdensity of exchanges and number of connections\u201d\nwhen compared with real life interactions (2007, p. 54). Group members may not know each other or even\nreal names but they are checking in with you daily or hourly and offering\nconversation and support, time and distance prevents our real-life community\nproviding such validation. Web 2.0 and\nsocial media\u2019s purpose in it lies somewhere between \u201cindividualism and\nsolidarity\u201d or \u201cutilitarian and altruistic\u201d, combining individual goals or\npurpose with identity building and community support (2007 p. 51 & p. 52). Through\nthe Group members individually reinforce their own identity and are bolstered with\nintellectual and emotional support to feel solidarity with the Group. Members may join a Facebook Group for a utilitarian\nreason, to access information or resources, however, remain in the Group for\nthe altruistic nature of the community. Several\nstudies from as early as 2005 noted the slow transformation in CMC from\nindividual motivated goals of users to concern for the greater good of the\ncommunity (2007, p.55). Status Update posts\non Chat 10 Looks 3 by members, often ask the advice of the Group or \u201chive\u201d, this\nis a \u201cstrong\u201d collective with \u201cweak cooperation\u201d helping to solve problems of\nthe individual. As Aguiton and Cardon\npoint out, the individual production\/cooperation\/participation is however\nnecessary for the Group to operate and accomplish its collective goals (2007,\np. 51). If individuals stop\nparticipating the Group ceases to be a community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There has been much speculation in\npublic media, because of recent world events, about whether Facebook Groups is\na good or bad tool for our times. It\ncould be said that this is a Manichean or black and white viewpoint and it must\nbe acknowledged that there are grey areas on this topic to study. What is readily agreed upon, in this global\nhegemony, is that measures need to be taken to assure us of the platform\u2019s\nsafety. These steps seem to have begun, Facebook\nmade an announcement on March 27, 2019 stating that it will enact a ban on\n\u201cpraise, support and representation of white nationalism and white separatism\u201d\nand that \u201corganized hate groups and (sic) have no place on our services\u201d (Facebook,\n2019). While this is an appropriate\nresponse, Facebook has to date declined to take on the legal and ethical responsibilities\nof a media company choosing to call itself a platform, even though it is fast\nbecoming one of the largest sources of news in the world, with founder Mark Zuckerberg\nstressing Facebook is an internet tool and does not produce content (Facebook, 2018).\nA 2018 Forbes article poses that Facebook sees Groups as an opportunity for\nbusiness to reach the public under the guise of community engagement. It cites\nexamples of large companies forming groups and interacting with their customer\nbase as a community rather than direct advertising (Holmes). While the nature of many Facebook Groups and individual\nmembers has evolved to altruism and community enrichment, the nature of\nFacebook itself seems alternately motivated. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Closed Facebook Groups are diverse\nin purpose and nature, where one can be referred to in popular media as a \u201ccult\nof kindness\u201d (Pitt, 2018) another is referred to as \u201canother deadly threat\u201d (Rubinsztein-Dunlop,\n2019). Whether these social media\ncommunities begin online or are an augmentation of an already offline community\nit can be argued that the key features of an administrated forum of CMC are\n\u201cambient intimacy\u201d, the feeling of familiarity with a shared unique language,\nthe \u201cstrength in weak cooperation\u201d with frequency of exchanges and sheer number\nof contacts, the ability to build identity through the production and sharing of\ncontent and the immediacy and low cost properties. It is these key features which enable the\nplatform of Closed Facebook Groups to continue to facilitate and enrich the community\nexperiences with increasing popularity. The world of Web 2.0 and social media is very\nquickly changing world. Through this research, it has become evident that most\nFacebook Groups along with other social media groups have a combination of online\nand offline communities branching out from the central group. The intertwined or interdependent nature of\nFacebook Groups, other social media, traditionally offline communities and\nbusiness is an area for possible future study. REFERENCES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Aguiton C. & Cardon D. (2007). The Strength of Weak Cooperation: An\nAttempt to Understand the Meaning of Web 2.0. Communications & Strategies, 65(1st<\/sup> Quarter)<\/em>, 51-65.\nRetrieved from https:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1009070<\/p>\n\n\n\n Crabb, A., Sales, L. (n.d.). About this Group [Profile Post]. Chat10Looks3<\/em>. Retrieved from\nhttps:\/\/www.facebook.com\/groups\/chat10looks3\/permalink\/2264690217145175\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n Devlin, P. (2018, June 7). Far-right fight club: United Patriots Front\nOpens \u201cmen-only\u201d gatherings where members can punch on with each other in front\nof an Australian flag. Daily Mail\nAustrali<\/em>a. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.dailymail.co.uk\/news\/article-5815685\/Far-right-fight-club-United-Patriots-opens-men-gatherings-Sydney-Melbourne.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n Donath, J. (1999). Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. In\nP. Kollock, & M. A. Smith (Eds.), Communities\nin Cyberspace<\/em>, 29-59. New York Routledge. Retrieved from http:\/\/smg.media.mit.edu\/people\/Judith\/Identity\/IdentityDeception.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n Facebook (2007). Platform is here. Retrieved\nfrom https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/notes\/facebook\/platform-is-here\/2437282130<\/p>\n\n\n\n Facebook (2018). A blueprint for content governance and enforcement.\nRetrieved from https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/notes\/mark-zuckerberg\/a-blueprint-for-content-governance-and-enforcement\/10156443129621634\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n Facebook (2019). Standing Against Hate. Retrieved from https:\/\/newsroom.fb.com\/news\/2019\/03\/standing-against-hate\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n Holmes, R. (2018, October 29). Are Facebook Groups the\nFuture of Social Media (or A Dead End)? Forbes<\/em>.\nRetrieved from https:\/\/www.forbes.com\/sites\/ryanholmes\/2018\/10\/29\/are-facebook-groups-the-future-of-social-media-or-a-dead-end\/#c4681491d236<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hunter, S. (2018, December 10). [Comment on Facebook post].\nRetrieved from https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/groups\/chat10looks3\/permalink\/2264690217145175\/?comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22O%22%7D<\/p>\n\n\n\n Millar, N. (n.d.). About this Group [Profile Post]. Mums n\u2019 Bubs \u2013 Logan<\/em>. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/groups\/140405902638033\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pi, S-M., Chou, C-H. & Liao, H-L. (2013). A study of Facebook Groups\nmembers\u2019 knowledge sharing. Computers in\nHuman Behaviour, 29,<\/em> 1971-1979. DOI:\n10.1016\/j.chb.2013.04.019<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pitt, H. (2018, December 16). A Cult of kindness\u2019: Sales and Crabb Chat\n10 Looks 3 an online hit. The Sydney\nMorning Herald<\/em>. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.smh.com.au\/national\/cult-of-kindness-sales-and-crabb-chat-10-looks-3-an-online-hit-20181214-p50mes.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ransom-Hughes, M. (Producer), Kanowski, S. (Presenter), Millar, N.\n(Guest). (2018, December 6). More Power to the Mums. Conversations<\/em> [Audio Podcast]. Retrieved from\nhttps:\/\/www.abc.net.au\/radio\/programs\/conversations\/nat-millar\/10569356<\/p>\n\n\n\n Reichelt, L. (2007, March 1). Ambient Intimacy [Blog post].\nRetrieved from http:\/\/www.disambiguity.com\/ambient-intimacy<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ridings C. & Gefen D. (2004). Virtual Community Attraction: Why\nPeople Hang Out Online. Journal of\nComputer-Medicated Communication, 10(1)<\/em>, 1-32. Retrieved from https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/full\/10.1111\/j.1083-6101.2004.tb00229.x\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rubinsztein-Dunlop, S. (Reporter). (2019, March 25). Under the Radar. In\nS. Neighbour (Executive Producer), Four\nCorners<\/em>. Sydney, NSW: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved from\niview.abc.net.au\/Four Corners Sandry, E. (2014). \u201cFace to Face\u201d Learning from Others in Facebook Groups,\nDigital Culture & Education, 6(1), 1-12. \nRetrieved from http:\/\/www.digitalcultureandeducation.com\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/sandry.pdf<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thompson, C. (2008). Brave New World of Digital Intimacy. The New York Times. <\/em>5 September.\nRetrieved from http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2008\/09\/07\/magazine\/07awareness-t.html?_r=.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Meryl Proost Curtin University Abstract This paper looks at the properties of Facebook Groups and how this online platform can facilitate an enriched community experience.\u00a0 It examines three examples of Facebook Groups which have used this platform to enrich their own communities, Chat 10 Looks 3, Mums n’ Bubs \u2013 Logan and United Patriots Front.\u00a0… Continue reading Facebook Groups Enrich the Community Experience<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":43,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[147,151,149,148,111],"class_list":["post-245","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-communities","tag-chat10looks3","tag-facebooklife","tag-loganmumsandbubs","tag-podcast","tag-christchurch"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/43"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=245"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":252,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245\/revisions\/252"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=245"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=245"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Open\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=245"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n