Over the last decade there has been a rapid change in the way in which people communicate on the Internet as the transition from Web 2.0 to Web 3.0. Within this paper the differences between the how communities are formed and interact on Web 2.0 in contrast to Web 3.0 will be discussed. This paper will show how it is easier for communities to form since the shift to Web 3.0 using the YES Theory and TikTok as examples on how communities can be formed on Web 3.0. It will also discuss how communication on each of these forms of the web limits or increases users’ ability to create and maintain communities online and offline.  

Web 2.0 is the term used to describe the way in which people used the internet to communicate information between people. The internet was being used at the time to share content that was written by creators and read by users with no communication between each party (O’Reilly, 2009). The little to no communication between creators of content and readers of the content means that all communication was one-way. This one-way communication limits Web 2.0’s ability to create new community groups that come from a large range of people. However, due to the slow creation of social media networks there was a shift away from limited community groups being able to form based around their own geographical location (Sfetcu, 2018). The main way we can see this correlation is the way we have classified these sites as social networking due to them being about bringing your personal network online.

Communication between users on Web 2.0 was limiting due to the nature of user interfaces and the newness of these sites. Web 2.0’s user interfaces were limited to it users because they would not allow for much interaction between users focusing mainly on writing and reading on these sites. Although commenting and liking were available on these sites all of these were one-way communication mainly and limited how people interacted as all communication was public and seen by the same users as the post was (O’Reilly, 2009). Due to the fact that communication is a key part of creating and maintaining communities and relationships the fact that Web 2.0 strongly impacted the forming of new communities and limited the outreach that users could possibly have on the web.

Within Web 2.0 the creation of social networks was introduced with the creation of Myspace and the increase in usage of personal websites. The creation of these sites allowed communities that are already connected offline to start to connect online (Lai & Turban, 2008). Myspace is one of the best examples of these new communities being formed online. The format of each user’s profile page cultivates community with the top 5 aspect with friends and family being able to share who are their best relationships within their personal communities (Scherp et al, 2009). This format, however, can be limiting when branching out into creating new community groups without having to meet new people offline.

The lack of community building can also be seen with the increase of personal blogs that were created during this period of time.  Personal blogs, allowed for the everyday internet user to be able to write on the web with a personal style to share their own opinions on the world around them. This form was all one-way communication with writers being able to share in a new format while readers were able to comment very little and only when writers would allow (Sfectu, 2018). Although readers were able to comment of individual posts there was little to no interactions between writers and readers and readers to readers. These interactions had little to no impact on creating communities focused on the interests and connections outside of geographical location, due to these blogs being hard to find if you weren’t in contact with the creator (O’Reilly, 2008).

Web 2.0 had a limiting communication structure which controlled the growth of networks and communities. This is because the way in which users were able to add content and contribute to the stream of content in a collaborative way. The limits to content creation had large constraints on users and how community is formed due to interests and passions (O’Reilly, 2008). Overall, Web 2.0 did not allow for its users to be able to connect with a wide range of new individuals with similar interests due to the geographical limitations with communications. However, this changed with the creation of Web 3.0 and the shift away from social network site to social media site and content creation and collaboration.  

With the creation of social media site like Facebook and Instagram started the transition from Web 2.0 to Web 3.0 and the semantic web that users are used to today. This form of web is based on the principle that everyone on the internet is a creator, and all forms of content is easily accessible and created due to the wider community on the internet (Lassila and Hendler, 2007).  This shift can be seen with the change not just with the way in which users communicate on the web but also the way in which these new social sites are label, from social networks to social media site. The change in name shows how social media is no longer just about bringing your personal networks online but how these sites are about the media that is being created on these apps and site (Sfcetu, 2018).

When comparing the way in which communities are formed on Web 3.0 to Web 2.0 the best example is Facebook, which was the first of these social media sites to pop up. On Facebook there is a similar format to the Myspace where users can friend people as they meet them offline, but what made Facebook different was the ability to join groups and pages of people with similar interest as the users without having to have met anyone in the group offline. This allowed for the users to be able to form new community groups with other users who they may have not ever met but still had a strong interest in the same things (Atzmuller, 2012). This concept of being able to follow pages and groups of interests was the major jumping point for the changes in the way communities are formed on Web 3.0 because users became able to branch away from only communicating with people who they have already known.

As the popularity of using social media sites grew, they started to be used for the creation of fan pages and fan groups for all forms entertainment from books to singer and YouTubers. Fan pages allowed for the followers of popular people to be able to communicate with each other no matter their geographical location. An example of this is the Yes theory fan pages and community groups that have been able to form all over the world due to users love for the mission of this production company. Yes Theory is a YouTube channel that is based in LA that is focused on impowering their viewers to step out of their comfort zones and saying yes to things that scare them (Yes Theory, n.d). As a part of this mission they strongly encourage their followers to reach out to others become their own smaller community groups in their own cities and town.

Yes theory uses their production company to create content that inspires their audience to step out of their comfort zones. As a part of this movement, they encourage them to reach out to others within their local community to do things out of their comfort zones. The way in which most of these groups are formed is through Facebook and Instagram. With the changes in Web 3.0 the ability to search and get recommended groups and pages that are suggested to you based on your interests, it allows for followers of Yes Theory can connect together even if they live separately but is have the drive to communicate with likeminded individuals (Cummings, 2021). With large groups being formed online the change to Web 3.0 has allowed for these online groups to be able to meet in person leading to a new form of community to form from a link on the web. 

With stan groups, groups of hardcore fans that love entertainers, becoming a large part of the web space forming on Web 3.0 has increased the amount of fan meet ups due to community forming and communication. These stan communities that have formed on Web 3.0 have now got platforms to not only create content online but spaces that allow them to meet up in person with others in their area (Elias, 2022). There has been a large increase in stan group meets ups over the last year to support their favourite entertainer. These groups have been able to grow into worldwide communities with power to change things due to Web 3.0 and their ability to communicate (Elias, 2022).  

With the changes in Web 3.0 the way in which we form communities has dramatically changed as Web 3.0 has allowed for users to interact with completely new people due to their interests. As a part of Web 3.0 algorithms are the driving factor with sharing new pages and groups to users based on their use of the web and their search history to show them what is deemed as being desirable to the users (Beers, 2009). These algorithms allow for new communities to be formed and run, this allows for specialized groups to become strong communities online and offline. These communities that are formed due to algorithm allows for some members to find content without being actively involved in the community prior, this can be seen with TikTok.

TikTok is seen to have the best algorithm of all Web 3.0 apps and sites, this is because every time a user uses the app and views a video the app is already adjusting each person for you page to target you with the best content for you (Beers, 2009). The app allows for users to become a part of a community without having to join a group or apply to be a part of the community online. TikTok has opened the door for users to be able to see content about their interests purely through their interactions with videos on the app. This creates new communities without users having to seek them out for themselves creating new paths for users and creators alike. The biggest example of this is Book Tok that is an area of the app that is focused on books that users recommend without having to join a book club or a virtual club which could both cost a lot of money (Johanson at el, 2022).

 

Overall, with the shift from Web 2.0 to Web 3.0 the way in which people communicate online has dramatically changed. With more users on Web 3.0 compared to Web 2.0 using the web to create and join communities as Web 3.0 is created to be a collaborative space for users. While Web 2.0 used the internet to help users to create content in a personal intent with little communication between users. The shift changed the way in which people viewed how the web could be used to help form new communities with Web 3.0 becoming the best interface for users to meet new users and form groups that are not only online, but also offline groups based around their interests and passions. Overall, Web 3.0 has allowed for communities to be able to form and be maintain easily and efficiently, changing the way we look at the web as an interactive tool.

 

 

References

 

Atzmuller, M. (2012). Mining social media: key players, sentiments, and communities. Social networks and data mining. Vol 2. Pg 411-419. https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/widm.1069

 

Beers, D. (2009). Power through the algorithm? Participatory web cultures and the technological unconscious. Sage Journals. Vol 11. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444809336551

 

Cummings, M. (2021). The powerful global impact of yes theory. Cultures. https://www.cultursmag.com/the-powerful-global-impact-of-yes-theory/

 

Elias, N. (2022, June 14). The Fangirls Deserve Your Respect. The Cut. https://www.thecut.com/2022/06/the-social-power-of-fangirls.html

 

Johanson, K, Schoonens, A, Reddan, B, Rutherford, L & Dezuanni. (2022, May 10). What is BookTok, and how is it influencing what Australian teenagers read. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/what-is-booktok-and-how-is-it-influencing-what-australian-teenagers-read-182290

 

Lai, L.S.L., Turban, E. Groups Formation and Operations in the Web 2.0 Environment and Social Networks. Group Decis Negot 17, 387–402 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-008-9113-2

 

O’Reilly, t. (2009). What is Web 2.0?. O’Reilly Media. https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NpEk_WFCMdIC&oi=fnd&pg=PT3&dq=web+2.0+&ots=O_TyT7jxJX&sig=bs-rVQE1smL341QW_e12L0XIIKQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Scherp, A, Schwagereit, F, Ireson, N, & Lanfranchi V. (2009). Leveraging Web 2.0 Communities in Professional Organisations. Workshop on the future of social networks. http://mklab2.iti.gr/files/ScherpEtAl-LeveragingWeb2Communities.pdf

 

Sfetcu, N. (2018). Web 2.0 Social Media, Social Networks. MultiMedia Publishing. https://play.google.com/store/books/details?pcampaignid=books_read_action&id=HUpQDgAAQBAJ&pli=1

 

Lassila, O & Hendler, L (2007). Embracing “Web 3.0”, in IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 90-93. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/4196182

 

Yes Theory. (n.d.) About us. https://yestheory.com/about/