Survey Says...

For this week’s blog, I interviewed my girlfriend, age 25, my mother, age 54, and my aunt, age 61. I emailed the questions to my mother and girlfriend, as they are both frequent internet users. For my aunt’s responses, I had to interview her in person, as she has neither email nor internet access.

My girlfriend primarily uses the internet for checking email a few times a day, shopping, finding movie times, and checking Myspace. She isn’t comfortable with the internet in general and tends to avoid blogs, chat rooms, and the like. She is wary of talking to “creepy” people online. She thinks that technology has absolutely changed her life and loves the convenience of having such quick access to information (actor’s pages on IMDB.com, for example) but hates that she often finds herself wasting hours online accomplishing nothing. She has similar feelings about television. She uses the internet, but not as much as her friends do. She is frequently frustrated with technology and often feels that she dislikes the internet because of it.

My mother uses the internet at home for email and shopping online, as well as to make travel reservations. She uses it more extensively at work, where she is the Payroll Supervisor. At her job, she uses the internet to contact banks, lawyers, insurance companies, and anyone else her job requires her to get in touch with. She said it is much easier to email to get a question answered than to “play phone tag all day.” She also uses it for IRS payroll forms, state and federal tax information, worker’s compensation claims, and online banking. She is very comfortable with the internet, but is wary of emails that come from sources she doesn’t recognize. The IT department at her employer makes sure that the company’s spambusting software is up to date. Mom “loves” the internet because it has made her job much easier by eliminating a lot of paperwork and expediting processes.

My aunt has practically no experience with the internet, or computers for that matter. She’s been a waitress for nearly 40 years so her job has not required her to use much technology. She works at a local family-owned restaurant where they take orders on paper pads and hand them to the cooks; there is no computerized ordering system. About as close as she gets to a computer is the credit card machine at work, which she still admits she sometimes finds frustrating. She’s never really had any interest in owning a computer or getting on the internet. She’s heard a lot of bad things about porn sites and child predators. The technology has not changed her personal life very much, though she sometimes finds it hard to get in touch with a company or take care of business when her only option is to do so online. She recently renewed her food handler’s certification and I basically had to ask her the questions and put the answers in for her, she had no idea how to do so.

In chapter 8, Wood and Smith discuss fragmentation, or the loss of cohesion within a community when members aren’t all communicating in the same ways. I definitely see how this kind of divide can develop. My mother and my aunt are only six years apart, but I tend to think of my mother as more modern and intelligent because she can utilize the forms of communication I am most familiar with. I tend to see my aunt’s inability to do so as a sign of age or disconnectedness. She seems almost an entire generation older than my mother because she clings to forms of communication that seem archaic to me. I almost feel as though she is incapable of learning to use the internet, it seems like an indecipherable concept to her.

I think the degree to which one is required to use technology is a huge differentiating factor in how people feel about it. Judging by their interview responses, my mother seems far more savvy than my girlfriend who is 30 years younger simply because she is forced to use the internet at her job on a daily basis. By comparison, my aunt’s job requires almost no interaction with technology, so she has been able to remain ignorant without negative consequences.

I wonder if my mother and my aunt’s circumstances were reversed, would I still see my mother as the smarter of the two? It’s interesting how people’s use of technology influences the way we see them.

Online Communities and Social Interaction

For this assignment, I chose to join a forum without a specific topic, more of a general discussion board. I have a friend or two who are members there and they’re always encouraging me to join, so I signed up to see what all the fuss was about.

This particular forum has a very tight-knit group of regulars that it’s difficult to break into. I had it easy, simply by being introduced to the group by one of the established regulars, but for other “newbs,” the place isn’t terribly friendly. There’s definitely a period of hazing or initiation that one has to pass through in order to be accepted. Each user’s post count is displayed on each of their messages, and those with very small numbers are often ignored, and sometimes even flamed (that is, insulted) unmercifully. It’s definitely not an environment that is welcoming to a newcomer. There are some reasons for hostility toward those with low post counts, however. Many new accounts are created for the sole purpose of posting advertising or referral links, so until a new person establishes that they’re there to contribute to the discussion, not advertise for some porn site, they’re generally kept at arm’s length.

The forum also has a “reputation” system. Each user has a “rep” meter that is displayed below their name on each post. The meter is a series of green or red bars that show how much positive or negative rep a person has received. Rep is given by other members of the site. Those with high post counts and a lot of positive rep are able to add or subtract the most rep from other users. Users give positive rep for content they enjoy or when a user posts a particularly funny quip, and they give negative rep for spammers, rude people, or anything they simply disagree with.

The rep system figures prominently in the social component of the site. I knew that I had been accepted when several of my posts garnered positive rep from established members of the site. Conversely, users who post insulting comments or disagree with established forum tenets end up drowning in negative rep quite quickly.

As far as dispute resolution, matters involving explicit rule violations (posting referral links, spamming, threats against a member, posting adult material in a non-adult forum) are usually taken care of fairly quickly by one of the site’s moderators. Users can report posts that violate rules to bring them to the attention of a moderator. Non-rule violations, like rude comments or any behavior that runs contrary to the smooth functioning of the forum, are taken care of in the court of public opinion. Once someone runs afoul of the majority of the site’s users, they are quickly ostracized and insulted. Reputation also disappears at an astonishing rate. Those stupid enough to fight back end up with private messages filled with objectionable material.

There are threads of the forum devoted exclusively to lengthy flame wars between two people or groups of people who disagree. There are also threads devoted to flaming specific people who irritate certain members.

This type of social setting is one that is only possible on the internet. It’s always amazed me that social outcasts, the people who are so often clamoring for equal treatment and speaking against social discrimination, are the first ones to become exclusive and form cliques when they are in the majority. The anonymity of the internet is a kind of equalizing force. Online, the stereotypical nerd’s superior intellect makes him the bully and gives him the power to punish others socially.

It is amazing, though, the friendships that some of the people who post on this forum have formed. Many have made trips to visit one another, even those in other countries. Many count the site’s users among their best friends. It’s almost impossible to imagine how any of these friendships could have ever been formed without the internet.

I wonder, though, if the internet were not available, would these people actually go out and meet people locally or would they be stuck at home forever? Is the internet their social outlet because it’s easy, or because it’s the only way they can connect with the outside world?

Postman worries about technology replacing other forms of interaction and argues that we lose something when computers become our sole source for information or interaction. It’s true, something is lost when people communicate solely online, at least when it becomes a substitute for actual human interaction. But what about people with overwhelming social phobias? People for whom online interaction may be the only way they are capable of forming human connections? Isn’t it possible that for them, replacing face to face communication with CMC is a good thing? It may be a stepping stone into a larger world for them, by helping them gain the confidence to actually go outside and meet an actual person.

Dissecting My Myspace.

I’ve had a myspace profile for a couple years now, so for this assignment I am going to attempt to take an objective look at it.

First, a quick rundown of my profile’s elements. My picture changes frequently, but it’s currently a shot from the fourth of July barbeque I attended with my family. My one-year-old daughter is sitting on my shoulders smiling and my eyes are focused upward. On my face is a bemused expression. My current headline is “Few things are more frightening to the establishment than a punk with an education,” a line I came up with while I was driving the other day. My current profile song is “Infected” by my favorite band Bad Religion. I have a slideshow with pictures of my daughter from birth to just recently. There is a video of me performing improv and a virtual cat you can feed and play with. I’ve also got the standard education and interests sections along with my top twelve friends and a long list of comments.

I’m interested in the ways I may be subconsciously (or consciously) manipulating my personal identity, as Wood and Smith describe in chapter 3.

I think there is a definite impression I’m trying to create for my profile’s viewers. My song choice, for example, is from my favorite band, so it’s not surprising, but I’d never think about putting some of the more popular music I enjoy in its place. My music snobbery is also present in my interests section. My list is almost all punk bands, with Bon Jovi and Johnny Cash thrown in for good measure. This list is far from comprehensive, however. When I’m riding in my girlfriend’s car and she puts in a Kelly Clarkson CD, I don’t exactly complain. I’d never put that I like her on my profile. (even admitting it here is a little difficult). I may enjoy her music, but I don’t want my friends to know about it. Ironic that it’s the people that know me best that I wish to hide this from. My profile is set to private, mostly to cut down on the spam I receive, so they are the only ones who will see it.

The elements of my profile combine to create a persona that, while it does represent a part of me, is far from comprehensive. It’s an interesting dichotomy, baby pictures versus punk music and photos of me partying with my friends. It’s a little embarrassing to realize, but my profile makes me look like a new father desperately trying to cling to his younger, less responsible days.

If I can inadvertently create a profile that conveys this type of impression, imagine the degree to which someone could purposefully distort their identity. I could remove all the baby pictures from my profile and change my children status back to none. We all have friends we rarely see in real life for whom the only updates on our lives come through myspace or facebook. If I had never updated my status or added the baby pictures in the first place, it would be as though my daughter never existed. It’s scary to think about, but I could probably maintain this façade indefinitely.

The Brad Paisley video I watched for last week’s assignment was intended to be funny, but it really wasn’t that far from the truth. It actually wouldn’t take much effort to create a myspace page that painted me as a very different person. It’s important to remember to take CMC with a grain of salt, there is no telling what kind of alterations the person you’re communicating with may have been able to make. Nobody is completely who they appear to be online.

Brad Paisley and The "Online" Persona

The main character of the video for Brad Paisley’s “Online” is a pizza delivery boy who lives in his parents’ basement and concocts an elaborate online persona that is almost completely antithetical to himself. His online identity is tall, handsome, rich, drives a fancy car, models for GQ, and is completely comfortable with women in a way that pizza boy is obviously not (judging by his inability to interact with his female neighbor until the end of the video).

It’s a bit of a cliché in the internet age but, like many clichés, it is based on truth. Personally, I know a guy who has a completely different personality online than he does in reality. He definitely represents himself differently in cyberspace. I think everyone does it to some degree. What overweight person hasn’t described themselves as “average” on a website? How many people exaggerate their education level or job position on myspace, or purposefully select photos that make them look their best while discarding those that do not portray them favorably? How many people on personals sites have years-old pictures of themselves instead of current ones? Practically everyone fibs a little when it comes to representing themselves online.

It’s no wonder this occurs. Given a chance to describe ourselves in any way we wish, in an anonymous, consequence-free environment, the temptation to lie is just too great. Much like movies or television can give a biased view of an issue by accentuating one side while downplaying the other, we can promote our positive features (or invent new ones entirely) while completely omitting our faults.

There are those who take this to extremes, like middle-aged men pretending to be teenage boys so they can chat with middle-aged men pretending to be teenage girls. The Dateline NBC “To Catch a Predator” reports are another enlightening example. Many of the men they catch soliciting sex from underage girls are semi-respectable members of society. It’s doubtful that many of these men would risk acting on their inappropriate thoughts were it not for the anonymity provided by the internet. The risk would be far too great.

Not all examples are this extreme, of course. Our pizza boy protagonist is simply trying to reach out to a world that he feels cut off from. Our celebrity-obsessed, beauty-conscious culture has created an expectation of attractiveness that he feels he cannot live up to and he consequently has almost no self-esteem. So, he creates what he feels is the ideal man and acts within that persona on the internet. It’s no more than a fantasy, he cannot possibly hope to meet any of his online friends in real life and have them accept him, especially when he’s based their relationship entirely on deception.

At least for him the ending is a happy one. He seems to realize the folly and pointless nature of his online façade and instead decides to take his life into his own hands and take a chance on the girl next door. Though, honestly, it amazes me that he even had trouble with women in the first place. His father is William Shatner, after all.

The ending in the video is a happy one, though the lyrics make no allusion to his realization. It’s ironic that a song about misrepresenting oneself online has to be subtly altered in order to achieve larger acceptance when translated to a visual medium. I seriously doubt that kind of meta-fictional meaning was intended by the video’s director, but it does give us something to think about…