 |
| Source |
The research was for a paper, a chosen topic for a class which explores the impact of technology on society.
This is that paper.
It's been graded (and received a 100%) and returned.
As some people have asked to see the results of the survey and/or the paper, this seemed like the best place to distribute it. Obviously.
There's no abstract. The gist of it is in the title. You might like it.
- The survey results are available here, nice and clean in a pdf: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0L6-YMPxtu7SnYyUy0tb3hCb0E/view?usp=sharing
The paper is long, and is available in two formats:
You can access the pdf here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0L6-YMPxtu7RTF2Q0loNmVpNnc/view?usp=sharing
and if you don't like that idea, you can read it here...(but the pdf is better because the footnotes are on corresponding pages, instead of a long stream at the bottom, like they are here. You know. If you're into footnotes or something.)
Implications of Social Networking on Identity
Ontological Impacts of Marketing, Privacy and Relationships
Introduction
The potential for digital culture to change aspects of
the public paradigm of personal privacy, and the ideals of a private life, are
vast. Since the creation of the world wide web, communication and information
technology has begun to shift from a strictly information marketplace to one
increasingly promoting life as spectacle. From the advent of photography and
telephones as forms of expression and communication, to the widespread
popularity of the smartphone, the overall effects that new technologies have on
consciousness, self-creation, ideals of privacy and relationships, have been a
matter of inquiry, but are yet to be fully determined. In terms of social networking
and mobile device use, which assist in increasing exposure, lines between
private and public self, become blurred.
According to a report by Pew Institute, the use of
social networking websites by adults in America is 74%*. Of that
74%, 42%[1]
of them use multiple social networking platforms, and 40%[2]
access social networking sites with their mobile phone. Additionally, there has
been a substantial increase in photo and video sharing among adults over the
last few years, up 8% between 2012 and 2013, increasing to 54% of adults ages 18
and over[3].
These numbers do not even take into consideration to teenage market. Where
teens are concerned, 95%[4]
of them are online and 81%* of them report using social networking.
Of that 81%, 91% of them report having posted a photo of themselves online, an
increase of 22% in just over seven years[5].
This rise can be attributed to the ease of sharing thanks to newer social
networking platforms and applications such as Intagram, Snapchap, and Vine - just
a short list in the plethora of available social networking video and image
sharing services available.
There have been massive increases in both the creation and
use of social networking over the years. As new mobile technologies and new
sharing platforms emerge, there is no sign that use will experience abetment. The
positive and negative implications of social networking and the ease of public
sharing thanks to mobile phone technology vary greatly among researchers. While
proponents of increased mobile social apps praise these new opportunities of self-expression,
identity creation, and ontology, critics assert that these new technologies and
their convenience is creating a vast living public gallery of exhibitionism and
voyeurism, creating increased cases of narcissistic behavior[6].
Still others offer a range of pros and cons of these technologies in regards to
relationship creation and sustainability, even career building. The wide ranges
of dystopian and utopian views in regards to the convergence of life with
technology, is a testament to the complexity of the issues regarding new and
emerging communication tools.
The Concerns
In a society where privacy is perceived as a top
priority, is the proliferation of social networking use parallel with these
concerns? Does the convenience of self-expression through social networking assist
in forming and sustaining relationships, and fulfilling needs? Does it lead to
higher levels of narcissism and feed latent narcissistic tendencies, or does it
lead to improved ontology and sense of self? Does social networking help in
identity creation and maintenance, or does it create a human commodity, making
an act out of the practitioner, pushing them to flagrant self-promotion in
attempt to be the next internet star? Is it all a form of communication art or
just pap proliferating procrastination? All of these issues are at the
precipice as use and development of social networking continues to expand its reach
and impact society in different ways.
The first phones and cameras were of relatively discrete
nature compared to the instant film, video cameras, and mobile phones that
followed. Now, with the convenience of all-in-one smartphones and social
networking platforms “wired” to near constant digital access, some argue that their
prevalence turns communication into a public spectacle. This perverseness helps
manifests online communication into a “public” performance of self, what might
be seen as an exhibitionist and voyeuristic paradise void of significance.
The motivation, as well as the long-term effects and
consequences of giving up portions of personal privacy in exchange for an
increased opportunity of self-expression and attention on a (conceivably)
national stage, is steeped in sociological and psychological factors. Fields of
research have been dedicated to creating an understanding of the overall
implications of increased self-expression through the convenient availability
and access of social networking platforms.
Social Networking and Society
In order to comprehend the many cultural impacts of
social networking on society and self, it is prudent to start with outlining
what social networking is and involves. Social networking can be described as a
form of communication practiced through online social networking platforms, or
social networking sites, and takes place within virtual online communication
communities. Social networking activities are interactive and a mutual endeavor
which includes many levels of digital interpersonal communication. This
communication employs various representations, such as symbols, keywords, and
images[7].
The use of social networking impacts a range of real life structures, from
business, to community environments, to all things personal. [8]
These digital communities are comprised of a wide range of user created and
curated content, such as video, photography, and written word – popular
examples of social networking platforms include Pinterest, Facebook, Twitter,
Instagram, Snapchat, Google+ and YouTube, and countless others. Content
creation technologies and systems related to these platforms are now commonly referred
to as Web 2.0 technologies, which is a designation for highly interactive
platforms, integrated with various medias, and high in consumer content
creation.[9]
At the basic level, social networking sites are recognized as an increasingly
important part of the framework of the internet and the World Wide Wide.
In the 2008 report from VVT, a technical research center
out of Finland, researchers anticipated that in the future social networking
would be pervasive in all facets of society. Not only would it be everywhere, but
it would be empowering, and it would create transparent environments; however, they
indicated that this would not necessarily be consistently beneficial. For
example, VVT researchers predicted social networking would narrow privacy[10].
Just shy of the ten year mark of what they referred to as “the break-through
year of social media”, it seems hard to dispute those predictions.
Most of the research in the field of social networking
communication has focused heavily on Facebook. This is largely due to it being
the most widely adopted social networking site to date, with the highest number
of active users compared to other social networking site.[11]
However, an increased interest in platforms such as Twitter and other new
emerging social networking services has begun. The proliferation of new
platforms has shifted the emphasis, mirroring and exceeding that of previous sociological
and psychological research, encouraging the further exploration of the impact and
effects on ontology and relationships. Within the research, opinions run the gamut
from dramatic dystopian predictions, to utopian prophesies. As members of
social groups attempt to establish and maintain identity and status in online
communities, as prolifically as they do in offline communities, even the
effects of social networking on material and advertising culture become
considered.[12]
Among dystopian talking points, there is cyberstalking,
online threats, identity theft, privacy violations such as the collection and
exploitation of personal information by media companies. On more intrapersonal
and interpersonal levels, concerns range from increased procrastination and
lower life satisfaction[13],
decrease in work productivity, potential psychological consequences,
relationship dissatisfaction and social isolation.[14]
Even becoming the victim of unknown sociological experimentation by the
platform operators themselves, which was the case with Facebook users in the summer
of 2014, is a potential negative outcome of using social networking.[15]
Some skeptics even mark the degradation of knowledge and intellectual pursuits
by the overabundance of social networking. As a noted opponent to web
technology, Nicholas Carr states, “the Web’s tendency to turn all media into
social networking will have a far-reaching effect on styles of reading and
writing and hence on language itself”.[16]
Despite the litany of charges against the use of social
networking sites, it is not as simple as chalking it up to the negatives. The
flip side of the coin is that proponents find that social networking can be
beneficial to the building and maintaining of social relationships, identity,
and reputation, and present opportunities for influence[17].
The argument then is that it can actually increase life satisfaction,
empowering individuals, as well as creating a foundation for knowledge
development.
There is not a clear determination of the consequences
of social networking use, and most research tends to be ambiguous and
contradictory. The intent, then, is to explore these subjects further, and
discover what consequences social networking might have on those who interact
with the technologies. From the cultural producers to the consumers, we can attempt
to contextualize what it means for the future of modern society as it pertains
to the impact of privacy issues, market influence and relationships on identity
and self.
Marketing and Ontology
Economics
of Self
Over the past twenty years, the development and growth
of the internet and communication technology has been a driving force behind
people digitally sharing their lives. This practice has taken place
increasingly through social networking where people use video, images, and
words intended to express their feelings, beliefs and opinions, crafting their
identity, as well as expressing their physical attributes. In essence, this has
turned the information marketplace into one that increasingly glorifies life as
spectacle; turning “cultural producers” into willing exhibitionists, and consumers
of their content into their voyeuristic counterparts, “making the previous
invisible, visible”[18].
This is particularly the case with smartphone technology, which increases
access on both ends, anyplace, anytime.
While social media networks are increasingly seen as a
place where businesses try to engage youth, the reality is that companies have
been trying to tap into the youth culture since the 1980s, engaging them
through popular culture media such as MTV, and querying them in focus group to
gain marketing advantage.[19]
Due to a shift in technology, the same types of marketing groups can not only
infiltrate youth culture online, but they can harness the power of popularity
of the “created identity” of those who become “stars” on platforms such as
YouTube, Instagram and Vine. Now, thanks to social networking, organizations
are reaching further into the lives of the consumer and capitalizing on their
desire to not only be “liked” by their peers, but even be “liked back by the
thing they like” for no other reason than “[because] then others […] like them”. This, along with the availability of a space
where one feels a perceived autonomy, fosters “self-empowering” benefits. [20] Of course it is not just the youth that
desires to be liked or have attention bestowed on them, nor is it just the
youth that is targeted for their marketing potential.
The type of attention provided by digital social platforms
for those who Nicholas Carah describes as "cultural producers", and
their consumers, is driven by the persuasiveness and integration of smartphone
technology into everyday culture.[21]
The perceived benefits of this attention can be powerful, says Clive Thompson,
particularly because the risks involved are not easily established in the
digital world.[22]
As Thompson states, “our endless appetite for
self-regard [ends up] turning everyone into a star of their own private reality
show”.[23]
Looking at in a seemingly less cryptic manner, the individuals involved transform
themselves into objects of culture to be critiqued, and their viewers (friends
and followers) become cultural analysts whose “jobs” are to judge content and
conjure meaning.[24]
One might argue that this performance of self is what
society wants; this can be illustrated by the growing number of “social media
stars”, or “personalities”, and the proliferation of people who connect with
them on a daily basis. It is this that Thompson refers to as “personal
branding” in the “corporate endeavor” of self[25],
and this validation from peer-groups is what keeps social networking users
present in generating of content. What appears to be simply a practice that
encourages members of society to “overshare nothing of discernible value”[26],
actually becomes an investment into the value of the user as a “brand”. This
phenomenon can be illustrated by the rise of companies like GrapeStory. who seek
out and represent social network talent, to Laundry Service (who has a division specifically for
Instagram personalities), and Conscious Mind, all honing and curating “Vine
comedians”, “Instagram photographers” and other platform “stars”, sending a
clear message that corporations also want what content consumers and producers hunger
for.[27]
These enterprises capitalize on the relatively
inexpensive marketing available through the broad media influence provided by
these digital producers, or “personalities”. The powers of these personalities
are calculated by “impressions” and numbers of followers to form a measure of
influence. This encourages an environment where the amateur content producers
“build and leverage [their] social network”, where they are not just the
producer, but the consumer and marketer[28]
and their reputation [29]
and social interaction becomes a form of currency.[30]
These social network content producers attempt to
attract consumers, or an “audience”, using their influence to promote consumables,
who, in their own quest for “fame by association” create “an endless [marketing]
feedback loop”. In this way, companies can create a perceived transparency and trustworthiness
surrounding their products and services[31]
via what Hearn calls “mystifying assumptions” regarding the perception of
purity, honest expression, and value.[32]
Additionally, this encouragement of self-promotion often
turns communication into entertainment, transforming “intimate messages […]
into fodder”[33], where
“public display and mediation of personal emotion and affect is clearly linked
to monetary value”[34]
and “social currency” [35]
of interaction, thereby feeding the exhibition-voyeur relationship preferred not
only by the social media masses that consume it, but corporations alike.
The assumption that social networking is simply a
platform for self-promotion, a vehicle in the monetization of self, may create
a bleak outlook for many. This postulation leads to disregarding social
networking as nothing more than a mechanism which reduces humanity to “lab rats
constantly pressing levers to get tiny pellets of social or intellectual
nourishment”.[36] Therefore,
we must delve deeper into the experiences and realities that are created by
those who use social networking to meet a variety of different emotional and
intellectual needs.
Identity and Ontology
The Rise of Social Networking
The relatively sharp rise in social network use in recent
years, and its sticking power, inspires the examination into why people continue
to use what some call “enabling technologies”.[37]
Social networking platforms provide
space and opportunity to attain and fulfill needs through mediated pleasure.[38]
This pleasure is derived from activities such as information gathering and
entertainment pursuits, as well as satisfying the desire for attention and companionship,
all which creates personal gratification[39]
and increased well-being. Often times fulfilling these desires requires the use
of multiple social network platforms. There is a divergence in the types of
social networking services that people select to fulfill their needs, which has
been linked to different factors.
According to studies, use or preference of one social
platform over others varies greatly and is dependent on a range of elements
including personality styles and individual needs. Researchers suggest that the
emphasis on the use of Twitter is that of “cognitive stimulation”, as opposed
to Facebook which they propose fulfills social needs of users who are more
extroverted[40], and
still other platforms fulfill aesthetic needs.[41]
Additionally, among the same individual, use among a range of platforms correlates
with fulfilling specific needs. [42]
For instance, a study by David John Hughes et al indicates that use of Twitter,
which provides opinion and information dissemination, is associated with less
desire to socialize, even though those that use the platform are said to score
more highly in sociability. The research also indicated the use of Twitter is
related to more goal-oriented purposes and a desire for cognitive stimulation, and
is not generally used to “mitigate loneliness”. Whereas those said to tend
towards neuroticism and who seek out more social outlets, fulfill that need on
Facebook “where people focus less on ‘who you are’ and more on what you have to
say”.[43]
While the nature of each platform seems compatible to
different needs, the distinctions between which platforms adequately fulfill
which needs may be far more nuanced that research suggests. There exist more crossovers, expanding across
various social networking sites, each serving multiple needs, each adding to
the experience of the cyber reality built in conjunction with “offline” as the
boundaries of cyber reality blur into offline reality. These cyber realities
become part of offline reality through the engagement of senses by the sharing
of video, sound recording, and images on touch screens creating “visibility in shared space on the screen”[44],
“virtual spaces [become tangible], not incorporeal dream worlds”[45],
rather real worlds where the self subsists.
In this suspension of cyber reality the “spatial self”
thrives. The world becomes one in which “individuals document, archive, and
display […] lived and/or imagined social and spatial […] experience […] to
represent or perform aspects [and] express identity.”[46] These activities of “spatial self” are not
confined to cyber experience but equally deployed in offline worlds and are
further established through activities such as geocoding content.[47]
Through acts of geocoding or “tagging” users are linked “together with other
people in a time and place” thereby “position[ing] content in relation to places,
people and practices”[48]
creating a “highly curated depiction of the individual.”[49]
Additionally, studies have shown that spending time on
social networks curating personal profiles, which is also a key to identity
management, can cultivate higher levels of non-narcissistic self-esteem[50] and
self-affirmation[51].
Nevertheless, some question how accurately users can perceive their own
identity in the potential dualities created between on and offline existence.[52] Online identity tension arises in part due to
the push and pull nature of forcing “user generated content and activity […]
beyond the context in which they were originally shared, creating a sometimes
useful but often socially awkward convergence of different areas of users’
lives”[53]
Identity
and Reputation Management
Social networks are places in which individuals and
communities exist, and is therefore merely an extension of reality, “a
multidimensional tool for expressing one’s identity to the outer world.”[54] It
is in this extension that the ideas of what is concrete and real evolves in
what Miller terms the “space of places” of “real-time communication”. This nearly
unrestricted virtual space of communication is where things become actual, and where
there is no limitation on experience; however, this actual experience is still
not perceived as tangible or “real by
some.[55]
Despite doubt, social networks become a simulation of reality which encourages what
Thompson calls “a ‘narcissistical sublime”[56]
in “a reconstruction of the offline world”[57]
where people can be free to play out their identity in what some see as a display
of self-importance.
It is, never the less, not just about narcissistic
self-importance. Social networking platforms also become a place of identity
management and creation, a place where economic values of “self” can be
realized in conjunction with the evolution and maintenance of character. Over
the years this concept has birthed a variety of online identify management
services such as Klout, Empire Avenue and BrandYouself.com which help a user
supervise the influence their identity has online.
“You are what you
like”, and being liked on social networking sites is largely achieved through impression
management via sharing, whereby what is “broadcast to the world becomes part of
[…] identity”.[58] In
a consumer-based society, who a person is, is synonymous with what they choose to
consume, and when in the online world what they choose to support and share via
social networking also becomes an extension of that; this is a practice called
“performing […] identity”[59].
The creation and performance of online identity becomes a “result of
computational processes, social and physical practices that ‘connect the dots’
and produce a depiction [which] conveys the user’s physical actions”[60],
projecting a representation of that person into the online world of social
networking. The careful construction, or performance, of this representation is
a form of identity management.
Farnham and Churchill contend that on a day-to-day basis,
even in the offline world, everybody participates in identity management by
maneuvering through different facets of identity for a variety of motives, both
personal and professional. They describe these facets as those synonymous with
roles such as parent, spouse, employee/co-worker, friend/lover. Thompson
supports this theory by stating that humankind has been “neurotically managing
their reputation for eons” in what many call “self-monitoring” [61]. Self-monitoring is a practice of close
observation of one’s own behavior in order to correct behavior[62],
and is just one way in which identity management is used to influence others. Not only does Farnham and Churchill claim that
it is important to be conscious of how you present yourself, but that it is
also something a “socially intelligent person” does. [63]
So in this way one can come to
understand that curating and maintaining an identity and reputation is not only
normal, but important , whether online or off.
However, identity management can take a dark turn. Take
for instance the “Catfish” phenomena, by which an anonymous user purposefully misrepresents
their self online, or fabricates a completely fake persona. The motives for
this can be vast, and sometimes unintentional and tenuous. McHugh illustrates
this in an article for Digital Trends, claiming that “the line between curating
your social presence to interact with other users and creating a digital personality
from scratch and having completely online relationships is getting thinner and
thinner.”[64] Complete “Identity Replacement”, in which the
key participant essentially swaps out their own identity for that for another,
sometimes fictional person is a phenomenon that exists to a lesser degree in
the offline world as well; as it is much more difficult to implement than
simple misrepresentation. [65]
However, the concept of misrepresentation may be more
nuanced that perceived at first blush. Managing or curating even an authentic identity
online to a wide range of “audience” can be messy and contradictory[66].
Doing so requires a demonstration of “personality traits [which] are associated
with linguistic cues […] and [which] can be accurately judged by unknown
others.” [67]
The internet is a source of anonymity. Identity, whether
offline or online, is a continuous construct. Being relatively anonymous to a
segment of people simply grants the freedom of disinhibition, providing an
opportunity for members to present aspects of their private perceived self. It
is through the presentation of this self, the person they think they are, via
disclosure and sharing, that makes those who are generally regarded as
introverts to “appear extraverted to some extent” [68],
and which may be perceived as misrepresentation. This is not a practice unique
to any particular age group, nor is it unique to social network platforms, but
is played out in much the same way online as offline.
Not only does online identity management take place in
social network environments through linguistics cues and image sharing, but
successfully doing so “requires a combination of cultural and analytic
strategies”[69]
to understand segmented sharing[70],
which often happens for employment and familial reasons[71]
Whereas in the past it was relatively easy to successfully segment your
identity into work-family-friends-etc., with the growing popularity and
widespread use of social networking, additional skills must be built through
privacy settings and strategic sharing decisions.
The level of self-construction and monitoring created by
the use of social networking sites may seem daunting because, as Carrs says,
“our social standing is, in one way or another, always in play [or] at risk […]
resulting [in] self-consciousness”[72]
and fear of rejection. Some claim that this risky exposure is developing an
increase in “self-regard”[73]
where old paradigms which focused on “religion, family, meaningful work, and
class” shifts from the construction of family and home to the construction of
self.[74]
Moreover, others recognize the limits and privacy concerns that arise from very
public sharing and self-expression that come with curating an accurate online
identity, and determine that some may come to realize they have “less control
[…] over the representational process they use to make sense of their world.”[75]
Making a Spectacle
Privacy
and Exhibitionism
Much of the online construction and maintenance of
identity, as well as the development of communities and relationships, is done through
public, “instantaneous and
real-time self-biographies” encouraged by social networking platforms. [76] People share and post photos for
“personal and group memory, relationship creating and maintenance, self-presentation,
and self- expression”.[77] Whether through words, images or
video, these activities have implications on privacy. The breach of
privacy is created when “virtual spaces integrate into everyday life as opposed
to standing apart from it.”[78]
This integration “enhances the
exhibitionist tendencies of social media”[79]
and promotes “watching practices embedded in everyday life and cultural
space.”[80]
Privacy isn’t always easy to come by, even when the
option is there. According to Pew Institute, over half of the participants
surveyed in 2012 admitted having difficulty with privacy controls when attempting
to manage their social networking accounts.[81]
Often times the controls are overly complicated, difficult to find or the
parameters change with little or no indication by the provider. Cumbersome
privacy controls, coupled with a grey area in terms of the legal boundaries
that surround reasonable expected levels of privacy, cause many issues in the
realm of social networking and perceived levels of privacy.[82]
Further, as workplace
surveillance of social media networking increases in tandem with online
disclosure and “electronic exhibitionism”[83],
work-related issues arise which can lead to discrimination, termination, and
ostracism, while creating other personal and legal issues.[84]
From an employment perspective other concerns arise as potential employers
increasingly implement systems of “cybervetting” for prospective employees[85],
which can lead to the rejection of a candidate based on what is found on social
networking sites.
These tangible risks have inspired legislation directed
at protecting employees from the ramifications associated with the blurring of
private and public life due to social networking.[86]
While the policies have been implemented in several states, they are not
necessarily a safety net for current or future employment as they rely heavily
on the transparency and disclosure of the employer.
Data
Mining
An additional privacy issue related to social networking
exists in data mining by the provider of the service. Often times the user has granted
the service provider full rights to all of their information, as well as the
images and other content they produce and post on the platform without even
realizing it.[87]
While data mining is recognized as a form of privacy violation in other
countries, where right to privacy is considered a human right[88],
the opt-out nature of terms and conditions creates a situation where little
legal action can be sought.
Data mining is used extensively to create marketing
campaigns, as well as gather information about mental health trends.[89]
In order to adequately gather information companies have to create compelling
services that seduce the user into sharing their most private information,
thoughts and feelings. As Claypoole aptly
states in Privacy and Social Media:
“[…]social media is not
simply a collection of online places that allow private information to escape,
but social media sites are organized to draw as much participation and
information out of us as possible. Like casinos built without sunlight or
clocks so as to encourage your further play, the social media sites and data
mining industry study online behavior and build manipulation machines designed
to entice you to remain engaged and to divulge information.”[90]
These
coercively seductive machines become persuasive in encouraging commodification
of privacy[91]
in an environment “where everything creates data” and in which the data is exploited
by companies for big profits.[92]
Voyeurism and Surveillance
It is this successful creation of interactive and
seductive technologies that makes exhibitionism and voyeurism so enticing, where
mutual a mutual relationship takes place. Voyeurism is an act of watching or
observing, and is the social networking world is the counterpart to the
exhibitionist performance of self. The behavior of voyeurism is nothing new, of
course. From casual human observation, spying and peeping toms, to viewers of
“cam girls” and reality TV - in its early days of Candid Camera and America’s
Funniest Home Videos - watching people is a construct of human life. However,
in social networking the possibilities for voyeurism are endless; there is an
open door to countless lives and countless ways to watch people. As this
voyeuristic behavior increases thanks to new technologies, some suggest that it
is just “one consequence of our increasingly disconnected lives”.[93]
When the voyeur is a government or organization, it
becomes surveillance. The surveillance mechanism of social networking[94]
is built into the process. The process requires data and information. The very
information social networks required to activate an account, and the level of
disclosure needed in order to perform identity online, creates an aura of “participatory
surveillance.[95] This
willing participation provides a manner of implied consent, and surveillance,
by anybody who wants to look, becomes the price happily paid. This price is for
the “freedom” of self-expression through exhibitionist behavior, in pursuit of
fulfilling personal sociological and psychological needs.
Of course this does not necessarily make the surveillance
okay, and as Bilge Yesil points out, it is important to remember that
surveillance persists outside of social networking. It is not uncommon to have
surveillance mechanism in stores, banks, work, private homes, hospitals, etc.,
and many people are not concerned with how it relates to social control or invasion
of privacy – if anything, he says, they welcome it.[96]
One exception is government surveillance, which seems to be the bone of
contention in this alleged open arms acceptance of surveillance.[97]
As social applications increase in number, and their
population grows in size, there is little indication that the fear of being
watched is enough to curtail the level of sharing and disclosure that persists
in social networking. One might conclude that the benefits of personal
gratification outweigh the costs and risks of data mining and surveillance.
Relationships and Communities
From an interpersonal relationship
perspective the disclosure of private matters and data associated with social networking
encourages and assists in building social capital. This social capital is
integral in the formation of trust, as well as the formation of identity[98]
in social networking relationships and communities.
Social networking can be used to share meaning, forge new
relationships, and bolster existing connections. It can keep people connected
and generate new opportunities to create friendships with the most unlikely of
people from the most unlikely of places. It can be used as a tool for sharing
culture and experience, as well as “neutralize tremendous cultural or
geographic differences”[99]
and building digital communities in which participants can learn from
experiencing cultural views outside their own.[100]
Through social networking platforms, communication,
consumption and entertainment culture has been transformed into a “non-material
culture of cyberspace, which is composed of ideas, language and social
relationships.”[101]
Users can relate, watch movies and play games, engage in sexual play, together
“interact[ing] with complex digital media […] as opposed to just carrying out
an activity, all from different parts of the world, if desired. The social
networking environment becomes a place where people create shared knowledge,
and acquisition becomes hybrid as users integrate knowledge of the tangible and
adapt it to the digital[102],
creating communities where “collaborative cognition”[103] and knowledge sharing
become paramount.
Successful integration of “physical and social
experience” into digital communication environments is influenced by what Thompson
calls “ambient awareness”.[104]
Ambient awareness is a phenomenon in which a person is conscious of the actions
and movements of another, without being in the same physical space with them. Social networking attempts to create a sense
of space and community through discourse, creating language with “expressions,
slang, smileys, activity words”. [105]
As Gotved claims, these virtual interaction, “supported by metaphors linking
them to physical reality and well-known social spaces [where] “practice and
imagination [become] main features”, are where “newbies become regulars, [and] friendships
and interpersonal relations seem to be at the core.”[106]
Additionally, the interpersonal framework of social
networking creates “cyber social reality” [where] aspects of our constructions
of reality” transforms into new cultures and communities. It is in these new
communities where decisions of inclusion, made by individuals and groups, related
to membership and trust[107]
are made, and where shared knowledge of established communications symbols “distinguish
‘us’ from ‘them’”[108]
further assisting in refining identity.
Conversely, some see social networks as a place where
intimacy is “strip-mined”[109]
and relationships are “devalue[d] through
mutual self-importance”[110],
a place that creates tensions between families and friends and tarnish images.[111] From
this dystopian perspective, these communities become a manufactured voyeuristic
world creating nothing more than parasocial relationships in which one side
knows an unequal amount of information about the other and real connections are
merely fabrications.
Methodology
The methodology involved in writing this paper includes
rigorous study of peer review articles and media reports related to all aspects
within the scope of the paper topic. In addition, to better understand the
perceptions of those involved with social networking, a survey was created using
Qualtrics and deployed via social networks. Those social networks were limited
to Facebook, Google+ and Twitter, Reddit. The survey was distributed over a
week and a half at different time intervals to reach a variety of users. The
questions asked in the survey centered on a range of topics including personal
motives for social network use, as well as general perceptions of social media
use. The goal of the survey was to better establish the perceptions of social
media as it pertains to various subjects of this paper through the generation
of quantitative data.
The study included a total of 131 participants, 43% (n~55)
men and 57% (n~74) women, 73% (n~94) of whom use social media more than one
hour a day. Of the respondents, 66% (n~85) say that social media is an
important part of their social life, and 88% (n~112) said that they believe
social media will play an important role in the future of personal
communication. This provides a strong indication that social media is a
prevalent part of people’s lives and relationships, and will continue to be so
in the future.
Part of personal communication and healthy social lives
is identity, as it is constructed to form trust and rapport among peer groups.
Among the participants, 46% (n~60) admit keeping their “real life” identity
private in most or all of their social media networks that they use the most. To
further ascertain reasons for curating an alternative identity, the
participants were asked to rank motivations for why they think people are apt
to do so. The two most likely reasons were related to work (~42) or personal
reasons related to friends, family or societal judgment (~29).
Identity creation and maintenance, as discussed, is done
through the performance of self in attaining spatial presence, and through
disclosure and sharing. Whether mundane or exciting, when viewed by friends and
followers, this activity translates into entertainment. Little research was
found regarding the requirement to entertain in order to perform identity and
whether or not it manifests as a stressor to social network users. To discover
if this problem exists, the survey participants were asked if they feel
pressure to perform while using social networking. The response was roughly as
predicted, as 45% (n~57) said they feel pressure at least some of the time to
be entertaining, or “be a spectacle”, while using social networking platforms.
Part of projecting spatial self in social networking
takes place through the sharing of artifacts, such as photos. When asked about the words that come to mind in
regards to people perceived as "popular" on social networks because they
share a lot of photos of themselves or their life, over half of the respondents
used descriptors such as needy, lonely, narcasstic, self-conscious, lame, and
annoying. Other respondents ranged from indifferent, sometimes indicating it
depended on who the person posting pictures was. There was a small indication
that photo sharing is perceived as a way of being misleading. This finding was
contrary to what one might assume based on the underlying legitimacy photos can
add to the projection of identity online.
When asked about how
sharing impacts privacy, 80% (n~102) agree or strongly agreed that sharing
personal details about life on social media platforms, through activities such
as posting photos, status updates and opinions, helps create communities - but also
creates various privacy issues.
The most interesting finding appeared to be in the
category of motivation. When considering one’s own motivations for using social
media, as compared to the motivations of others, there was a clear difference.
While many cited staying in touch with friends and family as a primary motive
for their use, they saw things such
as boredom or loneliness as being the key motive of others’ use of social
networking.
Some of the research
indicated that social networking can have damaging effects on relationships.
When participants were asked about social networking in terms of relationship
impact, 38% (n~49) conclude that social media is damaging, or a source of
tension, while a full 43% (~54) determine that social media is neither a good
nor bad influence on relationships.
Regarding the motivation
and continues use of social media, 61% (n~79) say that their reason for using
social media has evolved, or they have found new uses for it that were previously
unrealized, and this motivates them to keep using social media. Only a small
portion, 7% (n~9), indicated that they use social media because it is popular
to do so. One user specifically indicated “habit” was one reason for continued
use, while others cited boredom, entertainment and networking.
To conclude, the survey gave participants the
opportunity to make open-ended comments in regard to people’s thoughts and
feelings about social media. It was interesting to see how they varied in
response in a particular part of social media they chose to address. Of them
included statements about impacts on interpersonal relationships, the different
opportunities offered by different platforms as well as references to the
exchange of ideas and benefits related to allowing “silliness”. The following
are some responses of note:
“Today's social media, while for the most part reflects what we would expect to see with LARGE groups of people offline I also think the animosity that most social media sites allow has resulted in people being much more aggressive "bullying" than they perhaps might otherwise. I do believe that this needs to be seriously controlled and regulated and should be treated as severely as it would be 'in real life'.”
“I think tremendous potential is there, whether for positive, negative, or no influence at all - the decision rests in the hands of the individual user and the choices they make minute to minute and day to day. Like any powerful medium, it is a tool, and used wisely, it can enrich your life and benefit the world at large. Used foolishly or thoughtlessly, it's power to damage and lay waste is almost incalculable.”
“Social media is a powerful tool that is often times abused for the purpose of damaging people. Despite this shortcoming, it is a prevalent and easy way to keep in contact with friends and family. It has proven much more reliable than phone numbers and addresses when times of economic depression hit, because the accounts don't change simply because you can't afford to pay for them anymore.As a result I think it has been a powerful tool in the fight to keep my generation off the streets, and over all has aided in the reduction of homelessness due to its ability to maintain and forge new contacts. I speak from first hand experience.”
“It's fun. Sometimes you meet people you never would have otherwise. As long as it's used appropriately it can gain positive results. But, just like any tool, it can be used to ill gain.”
“Using social media is and always will be, a personal choice. like it or hate it, its a part of modern life now.”
“Social media is an important part of my life because many of my online friendships have transitioned to 'real life/real time' friendships.”
Limitations
Limitations to the survey
included a lack of sampling for age ranges. The type of relationship that social networks have an impact on was
also not specified. Additionally the participants were not sampled by age, nor
were they sampled by geographical region. However, it is reasonable to this
researcher that the participants were over the age of 18, and originating from
regions within Canada, Western Europe and the United States. The survey also
did not provide a broader option on use of social media past one hour a day,
which is extremely conservative in ascertaining the level of use by
participants.
Finally, within the scope of each issue presented in the
paper, as it pertains to social networking, there is further room for
exploration and elaboration that the length of this paper does not afford. The
topics of this paper are excellent candidates for further research.
Final Words
Based on the literature review, combined with the results
of the survey, social networking will remain a subject of debate and research
as it continues to engrain itself in all aspects of people’s lives. The
technology will continue to be useful as a way to build and nourish
relationships, new and old alike. As it “accumulates data about the rhythms of
everyday life, cultural practices and identities over the course of a lifespan”[112]
it will have a time capsule effect. This effect is already becoming evident by
the availability of the cataloging of Tweets by the Library of Congress, as
well as applications such as Timehop which “allows you to celebrate the best
(social media) moments of the past with your friends”. These digital artifacts
will live on as long as there are people who strive to store and protect them,
and have the potential to be useful to future generations when they research
the sociological and psychological impacts of social networking on our
generations.
It seems logical to deduce that social networking,
through privacy concerns and marketing opportunity, can have a profound impact
on identity. The research has indicated that social networking both assists and
is beneficial in fulfilling needs, and that people find the use a gratifying
and an increasingly important part of their life. While social networking has a
commodifying effect on identity and communication, and some feel pressure to
perform, the majority of people fall outside of the scope of making themselves
a financial asset.
There will always be those who decry technology, who
focus on the harm that it can create. It is important to look at it from many
perspectives, see the bad with the good, what is good and what can be improved.
It is equally important to be mindful that it is not the technology that causes
problems, but the abuse and misuse of technologies that arise out of negligent
and thoughtless human behavior.
Social networks are places where real people exist, and
share real parts of their lives, thrust their identity into cyberspace in
attempt to connect with others and be part of a social world. It’s not always
going to be perfect. To conclude, in the eloquent words of Yesil Bilge: “Ironically,
we are searching for the real in the very medium that exploits the real to the
fullest, saturates it with images, and gives it back to us. Hungry for the real
as ever, we find our selves hopelessly emerging in our stage-like world.[113]
Footnotes:
[1] Duggan, Maeve, and Aaron Smith. "Social Media Update 2013." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project. *As of January 2014
[1] Duggan, Maeve, and Aaron Smith. "Social Media Update 2013." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project. *As of January 2014
[2] "Social Networking
Fact Sheet." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project.
[3] Duggan, Maeve. "Photo
and Video Sharing Grow Online." Pew Research Centers Internet American
Life Project. Pew Institute
[4] "Teens Fact
Sheet." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project. Accessed
October 8, 2014.
* A 2012 number. Ages 12-17.
[5] Madden, Mary, Amanda
Lenhart, Sandra Cortesi, Urs Gasser, Maeve Duggan, Aaron Smith, and Meredith
Beaton. "Teens, Social Media, and Privacy." Pew Research Centers Internet
American Life Project.
[6] Williams, Ray. "Do
Facebook and Other Social Media Encourage Narcissism?" Psychology Today.
[7] Gotved, Stine. "Time
and Space in Cyber Social Reality." New Media & Society.
[8] Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta Bäck,
Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. Social Media Roadmaps: Exploring
the Futures Triggered by Social Media.
[9] Williams, David L.,
Victoria L. Crittenden, Teeda Keo, and Paulette Mccarty. "The Use of
Social Media: An Exploratory Study of Usage among Digital Natives." Journal
of Public Affairs
[10] Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta
Bäck, Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. Social Media Roadmaps:
Exploring the Futures Triggered by Social Media.
[11] Lunden, Ingrid.
"Tumblr Overtakes Instagram As Fastest-Growing Social Platform, Snapchat
Is The Fastest-Growing App." Tech
Crunch.
[12] Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces Have Material Culture: Goodbye
to Digital Post-materialism and Hello to Virtual Consumption." Media,
Culture & Societ.y
[13] Hinsch, Christian, and
Kennon M. Sheldon. "The Impact of Frequent Social Internet
Consumption: Increased Procrastination and Lower Life
Satisfaction." Journal of Consumer
Behaviour.
[14] Marche, Steven. "Is
Facebook Making Us Lonely?" The
Atlantic.
[15] Albergotti, Reed.
"Furor Erupts Over Facebook's Experiment on Users." Wallstreet
Journal.
[16] Carr, Nicholas G.
"The Very Image of a Book." In The Shallows: What the
Internet Is Doing to Our Brains. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010
[17] Williams, David L., Victoria L. Crittenden, Teeda Keo, and Paulette
Mccarty. "The Use of
Social Media:
An Exploratory Study of Usage among Digital Natives." Journal of
Public Affairs.
[18] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How Technology
Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books, 2013. Pg.
222
[19] The Merchants of Cool.
USA: PBS Frontline, 2001. Film.
[20] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[21] Carah, Nicholas.
"Curators of Databases: Circulating Images, Managing Attention and Making
Value on Social Media." Media International Australia.
[22] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books,
2013. Pg. 239
[23] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books,
2013. Pg. 220
[24] Carah, Nicholas.
"Curators of Databases: Circulating Images, Managing Attention and Making
Value on Social Media." Media International Australia, no. 150
(2014): 137-42.
[25] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books,
2013. Pg. 220
[26] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books,
2013. Pg. 221
[27] Marikar, Sheila.
"Turning ‘Likes’ Into a Career." The
New York Times
[28] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[29] Hearn, Alison.
"Structuring Feeling: Web 2.0, Online Ranking and Rating, and the Digital
‘reputation’ Economy." Ephemera: Theory and Politics in
Organization
[30] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[31] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[32] Hearn, Alison.
"Structuring Feeling: Web 2.0, Online Ranking and Rating, and the Digital
‘reputation’ Economy." Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization
[33] Carr, Nicholas G.
"The Church of Google." In The Shallows: What the Internet Is
Doing to Our Brains.
[34] Hearn, Alison.
"Structuring Feeling: Web 2.0, Online Ranking and Rating, and the Digital
‘reputation’ Economy." Ephemera: Theory and Politics in
Organization
[35] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[36] Carr, Nicholas G. "The
Juggler’s Brain." In The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to
Our Brains. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010
[37] Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta
Bäck, Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. Social Media Roadmaps:
Exploring the Futures Triggered by Social Media.
[38] Lior Strahilevitz,
"A Social Networks Theory of Privacy," 72 University of Chicago Law
Review 919 (2005).
[39] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[40] Hughes, David John, Moss
Rowe, Mark Batey, and Andrew Lee. "A Tale of Two Sites: Twitter vs.
Facebook and the Personality Predictors of Social Media Usage."Computers
in Human Behavior.
[41] Dixon, Gracie. "Art
vs. Exhibitionism: The Instagram Aesthetic" GVmag
[42] Hughes, David John, Moss
Rowe, Mark Batey, and Andrew Lee. "A Tale of Two Sites: Twitter vs.
Facebook and the Personality Predictors of Social Media Usage. Computers in Human Behavior.
[43] Hughes, David John, Moss
Rowe, Mark Batey, and Andrew Lee. "A Tale of Two Sites: Twitter vs.
Facebook and the Personality Predictors of Social Media Usage. Computers in Human Behavior.
[44] Gotved, Stine. "Time
and Space in Cyber Social Reality." New Media & Society.
[45] Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces Have Material Culture: Goodbye
to Digital Post-materialism and Hello to Virtual Consumption." Media,
Culture & Society.
[46] Schwartz, Raz, and
Germaine R Halegoua. "The Spatial Self: Location-based Identity
Performance on Social Media." New Media
& Society.
[47] Schwartz, Raz, and
Germaine R Halegoua. "The Spatial Self: Location-based Identity
Performance on Social Media." New Media & Society.
[48] Carah, Nicholas.
"Curators of Databases: Circulating Images, Managing Attention and Making
Value on Social Media." Media International Australia.
[49] Schwartz, Raz, and
Germaine R Halegoua. "The Spatial Self: Location-based Identity
Performance on Social Media." New Media & Society.
[50] Gentile, Brittany, Jean
M. Twenge, Elise C. Freeman, and W. Keith Campbell. "The Effect of Social
Networking Websites on Positive Self-views: An Experimental Investigation."
Computers in Human Behavior.
[51] Toma, Catalina L.,
"Affirming the Self through Online Profiles: Beneficial Effects of Social
Networking Sites." Published Lecture
[52] S Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta
Bäck, Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. Social Media Roadmaps: Exploring the
Futures Triggered by Social Media.
[53] Farnham, Shelly, and
Elizabeth F. Churchill. "Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and
Technical Issues in Being Yourself Online."
[54] S Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta
Bäck, Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. Social Media Roadmaps:
Exploring the Futures Triggered by Social Media.
[55] Miller, Vincent. Understanding
Digital Culture. London: SAGE Publications, 2011.
[56] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books,
2013. Pg. 221
[57] Gotved, Stine. "Time
and Space in Cyber Social Reality." New Media & Society
[58] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[59] Farnham, Shelly, and
Elizabeth F. Churchill. "Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and
Technical Issues in Being Yourself Online."
[60] Schwartz, Raz, and
Germaine R Halegoua. "The Spatial Self: Location-based Identity
Performance on Social Media." New Media & Society.
[61] Thompson, Clive.
"Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books,
2013. Pg. 238
[62] Adler, Ronald B., and
Judith A. Rolls. LOOK: Looking Out, Looking in. Canadian ed. Toronto: Nelson
Education, 2012. 26-71.
[63] Farnham, Shelly, and
Elizabeth F. Churchill. "Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and
Technical Issues in Being Yourself Online."
[64] McHugh, Molly. "It’s
Catfishing Season! How to Tell Lovers from Liars Online, and More." Digital Trends.
[65] Amichai-Hamburger, Yair.
"Identity Manipulation: What Happens When Identity Presentation Is
Not Truthful."
[66] Schwartz, Raz, and
Germaine R Halegoua. "The Spatial Self: Location-based Identity
Performance on Social Media." New
Media & Society.
[67] Qiu, Lin, Han Lin,
Jonathan Ramsay, and Fang Yang. "You Are What You Tweet: Personality
Expression and Perception on Twitter." Journal of Research in
Personality.
[68] Qiu, Lin, Han Lin,
Jonathan Ramsay, and Fang Yang. "You Are What You Tweet: Personality
Expression and Perception on Twitter." Journal
of Research in Personality.
[69] Carah, Nicholas.
"Curators of Databases: Circulating Images, Managing Attention and Making
Value on Social Media." Media International Australia.
[70] Farnham, Shelly, and
Elizabeth F. Churchill. "Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and
Technical Issues in Being Yourself Online."
[71] Farnham, Shelly, and
Elizabeth F. Churchill. "Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and
Technical Issues in Being Yourself Online."
[72] Carr, Nicholas G.
"The Church of Google." In The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing
to
Our Brains. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010 p. 120
[73] Christopher Lasch Via
Thompson, Clive. "Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is
Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin
Books, 2013. P221
[74] Van House, Nancy A.
"Collocated Photosharing, Story-telling, and the Performance of
Self." International Journal of Human-Computer Studies.
[75] Carah, Nicholas.
"Curators of Databases: Circulating Images. Media International Australia.
[76] Lior Strahilevitz, "A Social Networks
Theory of Privacy," 72 University of Chicago Law Review 919 (2005).
[77] Van House, Nancy A.
"Collocated Photosharing, Story-telling, and the Performance of
Self." International Journal of Human-Computer Studies.
[78] Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces Have Material Culture: Goodbye
to Digital Post-materialism and Hello to Virtual Consumption." Media,
Culture & Society.
[79] Lior Strahilevitz,
"A Social Networks Theory of Privacy," 72 University of Chicago Law
Review 919 (2005).
[80] Carah, Nicholas.
"Curators of Databases: Circulating Images, Managing Attention and Making
Value on Social Media." Media International Australia.
[81] Madden, Mary.
"Privacy Management on Social Media Sites." Pew Research Centers
Internet American Life Project.
[82] Lior Strahilevitz,
"A Social Networks Theory of Privacy," 72 University of Chicago Law
Review 919 (2005).
[83] Herbert, William A.
"Workplace Consequences of Electronic Exhibitionism and Voyeurism." IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.
[84] Abril, Patricia Sánchez,
Avner Levin, and Alissa Del Riego. "Blurred Boundaries: Social Media
Privacy and the Twenty-First-Century Employee." American Business Law Journal.
[85] Herbert, William A.
"Workplace Consequences of Electronic Exhibitionism and Voyeurism." IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.
[86] Claypoole, Theodore F.
"Privacy and Social Media." American Bar Association.
[87] Terms and Conditions May
Apply. USA: Distributed by Ro*co Films Educational, 2013. Film.
[88] Claypoole, Theodore F. "Privacy and
Social Media." American Bar Association.
[89] Nauert, Rick.
"Data-Mining Twitter Posts for Mental Health Insights." Psych Central.
[91] Sevignani, S. "The
Commodification of Privacy on the Internet." Science and Public Policy.
[92] Frontline: Generation
Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
[93] Cooper, Al, and I. David
Marcus. "Internet Voyeurism." CIO.
[94] Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta
Bäck, Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. “Social Media Roadmaps: Exploring the Futures Triggered by Social Media.”
Espoo: VTT, 2008.
[95] Albrechtslund, Anders.
"Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance." First Monday.
[96] Yesil, Bilge. "Reel
Pleasures: Exploring the Historical Roots of Media Voyerism and
Exhibitionism." Counterblast: The E-Journal of Culture and Communication.
[97] Jaycox, Mark.
"Update: Polls Continue to Show Majority of Americans Against NSA
Spying." Electronic Frontier Foundation.
[98] Chen, Rui, and Sushil K.
Sharma. "Self-disclosure at Social Networking Sites: An Exploration
through Relational Capitals." Information
Systems Frontiers.
[99] Hinsch, Christian, and
Kennon M. Sheldon. "The Impact of Frequent Social Internet Consumption:
Increased Procrastination and Lower Life Satisfaction." Journal of
Consumer Behaviour.
[100]
Rikakis, Thanassis, Aisling Kelliher, and Nicole Lehrer. "Experimental
Media and Digital Culture." Computer.
[101]
Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces
Have Material Culture: Goodbye to Digital Post-materialism and Hello to Virtual
Consumption." Media, Culture & Society.
[102]
Rikakis, Thanassis, Aisling Kelliher, and Nicole Lehrer. "Experimental
Media and Digital Culture." Computer.
[103]
Thompson, Clive. "Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books, 2013.
Pg. 213
[104]
Thompson, Clive. "Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books, 2013.
Pg. 213
[105]
Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces
Have Material Culture: Goodbye to Digital Post-materialism and Hello to Virtual
Consumption." Media, Culture & Society.
[106]
Gotved, Stine. "Time and Space in Cyber Social Reality." New
Media & Society.
[107]
Gotved, Stine. "Time and Space in Cyber Social Reality." New Media & Society.
[108]
Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces Have Material Culture: Goodbye to
Digital Post-materialism and Hello to Virtual Consumption." Media, Culture & Society.
[109]
Thompson, Clive. "Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books, 2013.
Pg. 209
[110]
Thompson, Clive. "Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How
Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books, 2013.
Pg. 221
[111]
Herbert, William A. "Workplace Consequences of Electronic Exhibitionism
and Voyeurism." IEEE Technology and
Society Magazine.
[112]
Carah, Nicholas. "Curators of Databases: Circulating Images
[113]
Yesil, Bilge. "Reel Pleasures: Exploring the Historical Roots of Media
Voyerism and
Exhibitionism." Counterblast: The E-Journal of Culture and Communication
Bibliography
Abril, Patricia Sánchez, Avner Levin, and Alissa Del Riego. "Blurred Boundaries: Social Media
Privacy and the Twenty-First-Century Employee." American Business Law Journal 49,
no. 1 (2012): 63-124. Accessed November 6, 2014.
Adler, Ronald B., and Judith A. Rolls. LOOK: Looking Out, Looking in. Canadian ed. Toronto:
Nelson Education, 2012. 26-71.
Ahlqvist, Toni, Asta Bäck, Minna Halonen, and Sirkka Heinonen. Social Media Roadmaps:
Exploring the Futures Triggered by Social Media. Espoo: VTT, 2008.
Albrechtslund, Anders. "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance." First Monday
13, no. 3 (2008).
Albergotti, Reed. "Furor Erupts Over Facebook's Experiment on Users." Wallstreet
Journal, June 30, 2014. Accessed October 30, 2014.
1404085840.
Amichai-Hamburger, Yair. "Identity Manipulation: What Happens When Identity Presentation Is
Not Truthful." United Kingdom: Oxford Press, 2013.
Carah, Nicholas. "Curators of Databases: Circulating Images, Managing Attention and
Making Value on Social Media." Media International Australia, no. 150 (2014): 137-42. Accessed September 27, 2014. http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:325045.
Carr, Nicholas G. "The Church of Google." In The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to
Our Brains. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010.
Chen, Rui, and Sushil K. Sharma. "Self-disclosure at Social Networking Sites: An Exploration
through Relational Capitals." Information Systems Frontiers 15 (2011): 269-78.
Claypoole, Theodore F. "Privacy and Social Media." American Bar Association. January 1,
2014. Accessed November 6, 2014. http://www.americanbar.org/publications/blt/2014/01/03a_claypoole.html.
Cooper, Al, and I. David Marcus. "Internet Voyeurism." CIO. April 1, 2001. Accessed
September 16, 2014. http://www.cio.com/article/2441512/it-organization/internet-voyeurism.html.
Dixon, Gracie. "Art vs. Exhibitionism: The Instagram Aesthetic." GVmag. October 15,
2013. Accessed September 28, 2014. http://gvmag.co.uk/art-vs-exhibitionism-the-instagram-aesthetic/.
Duggan, Maeve. Photo and Video Sharing Grow Online. Rep. Pew Internet, 28 Oct. 2013.
Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
Duggan, Maeve, and Aaron Smith. "Social Media Update 2013." Pew Research Centers Internet
American Life Project. December 30, 2013. Accessed September 27, 2014. http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/12/30/social-media-update-2013/.
Farnham, Shelly, and Elizabeth F. Churchill. "Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and
Technical Issues in Being Yourself Online." Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing Conference. 2010.
Frontline: Generation Like. USA: Public Broadcasting Service, 2014. Film.
Gentile, Brittany, Jean M. Twenge, Elise C. Freeman, and W. Keith Campbell. "The Effect of Social Networking Websites on Positive Self-views: An Experimental
Investigation." Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012): 1929-933. ScienceDirect. Elsevier, 5 June 2012. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
Gotved, Stine. "Time and Space in Cyber Social Reality." New Media & Society 8, no. 3
(2006): 467-86. Accessed September 26, 2014. http://nms.sagepub.com/content/8/3/467.short.
Hawkins, Drew. "How the Recession Sparked Social Media." Social Media Today. April 19,
2010. Accessed November 16, 2014. http://www.socialmediatoday.com/content/how-
Hearn, Alison. "Structuring Feeling: Web 2.0, Online Ranking and Rating, and the Digital
‘reputation’ Economy." Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization 10, no. 3/4 (2010): 421-38. Accessed October 30, 2013. http://www.ephemerajournal.org/.
Herbert, William A. "Workplace Consequences of Electronic Exhibitionism and Voyeurism."
IEEE Technology and Society Magazine. September 13, 2011. Accessed December 15, 2014.
Hinsch, Christian, and Kennon M. Sheldon. "The Impact of Frequent Social Internet
Consumption: Increased Procrastination and Lower Life Satisfaction." Journal of Consumer Behaviour 12, no. 6 (2013): 496-505. Accessed September 27, 2014. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cb.1453/abstract.
Hughes, David John, Moss Rowe, Mark Batey, and Andrew Lee. "A Tale of Two Sites: Twitter
vs. Facebook and the Personality Predictors of Social Media Usage.“ Computers in Human Behavior 28, no. 2 (2012): 561-69. Accessed September 27, 2014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563211002457.
Jaycox, Mark. "Update: Polls Continue to Show Majority of Americans Against NSA Spying."
Electronic Frontier Foundation. January 22, 2014. Accessed December 15, 2014. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/polls-continue-show-majority-americans-against-nsa-spying.
Lehdonvirta, Vili. "Online Spaces Have Material Culture: Goodbye to Digital Post-
materialism and Hello to Virtual Consumption." Media, Culture & Society 32, no. 5 (2010): 883-89. Accessed September 26, 2014. http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/32/5/883.
Lior Strahilevitz, "A Social Networks Theory of Privacy," 72 University of Chicago Law
Review 919 (2005).
Lunden, Ingrid. "Tumblr Overtakes Instagram As Fastest-Growing Social Platform, Snapchat Is
The Fastest-Growing App." Tech Crunch. November 25, 2014. Accessed December 2014. http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/25/tumblr-overtakes-instagram-as-fastest-growing-social-platform-snapchat-is-the-fastest-growing-app/.
Madden, Mary. "Privacy Management on Social Media Sites." Pew Research Centers Internet
American Life Project. February 23, 2012. Accessed November 6, 2014. http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/02/24/privacy-management-on-social-media-sites/.
Madden, Mary, Amanda Lenhart, Sandra Cortesi, Urs Gasser, Maeve Duggan, Aaron Smith, and
Meredith Beaton. "Teens, Social Media, and Privacy." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project. May 21, 2013. Accessed September 27, 2014. http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/05/21/teens-social-media-and-privacy/.
Marche, Steven. "Is Facebook Making Us Lonely?" The Atlantic, March 2, 2012.
Marikar, Sheila. "Turning ‘Likes’ Into a Career." The New York Times, July 11, 2014.
Accessed September 27, 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/30/fashion/tinder-the-fast-growing-dating-app-taps-an-age-old-truth.html?ribbon-ad-idx=3&rref=fashion&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=Fashion & Style&action=swipe®ion=FixedRight&pgtype=article.
McHugh, Molly. "It’s Catfishing Season! How to Tell Lovers from Liars Online, and More."
Digital Trends. August 23, 2013. Accessed November 13, 2014.
online-and-more/.
Miller, Vincent. Understanding Digital Culture. London: SAGE Publications, 2011.
Nauert, Rick. "Data-Mining Twitter Posts for Mental Health Insights." Psych Central. December
10, 2014. Accessed December 15, 2014. http://psychcentral.com/news/2014/12/10/data-mining-twitter-posts-for-mental-health-insights/78445.html.
Palmer, Kate. "Britain's Social Media Stars Making £2,000 a Second." The Telegraph.
Telegraph Media Group Limited, 1 Sept. 2014. Web. 27 Sept. 2014. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/11049015/Britains-social-media-stars-making-2000-a-second.html.
Qiu, Lin, Han Lin, Jonathan Ramsay, and Fang Yang. "You Are What You Tweet:
Personality Expression and Perception on Twitter." Journal of Research in Personality46, no. 6 (2012): 710-18. Accessed October 17, 2014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009265661200133X.
Rikakis, Thanassis, Aisling Kelliher, and Nicole Lehrer. "Experimental Media and Digital
Culture." Computer 46, no. 1 (2013): 46-54. Accessed September 26, 2014. http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MC.2012.391.
Schwartz, Raz, and Germaine R Halegoua. "The Spatial Self: Location-based Identity
Performance on Social Media." New Media & Society, 2014. Accessed October 2, 2014.
Sevignani, S. "The Commodification of Privacy on the Internet." Science and Public Policy 40
(2013): 733-39.
“Social Networking Fact Sheet." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project.
Accessed September 27, 2014. http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/.
"Teens Fact Sheet." Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project. Accessed October 8,
Terms and Conditions May Apply. USA: Distributed by Ro*co Films Educational, 2013. Film.
The Merchants of Cool. USA: PBS Frontline, 2001. Film.
Thompson, Clive. "Ambient Awareness." In Smarter than You Think: How Technology Is
Changing Our Minds for the Better. New York: Penguin Books, 2013.
Toma , Catalina L., "Affirming the Self through Online Profiles: Beneficial Effects of Social
Networking Sites ." Published Lecture, ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems from CHI2010, Atlanta, GA, USA, April 1, 2010.
Van House, Nancy A. "Collocated Photosharing, Story-telling, and the Performance of Self."
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 67, no. 12 (2009): 1073-086. Accessed October 13, 2014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581909001256.
Williams, David L., Victoria L. Crittenden, Teeda Keo, and Paulette Mccarty. "The Use of
Social Media: An Exploratory Study of Usage among Digital Natives." Journal of Public Affairs 12, no. 2 (2012): 127-36. Accessed September 26, 2014. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pa.1414/abstract.
Williams, Ray. "Do Facebook and Other Social Media Encourage Narcissism?" Psychology
Today. June 13, 2013. Accessed December 1, 2014. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201306/do-facebook-and-other-social-media-encourage-narcissism.
Yesil, Bilge. "Reel Pleasures: Exploring the Historical Roots of Media Voyerism and
Exhibitionism." Counterblast: The E-Journal of Culture and Communication. November 1, 2001. Accessed September 16, 2014. http://www.nyu.edu/pubs/counterblast/issue1_nov01/pdf_files/yesil.pdf.
No comments:
Post a Comment