boyd, danah. (2007) “Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life.” MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning-Youth, Identity and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
danah boyd’s article investigates the function of social network sites in teenage social life. This article reflects arguments she has formed based on a two year study the way United States youth engage with the social network site, MySpace. <--- Click here if you aren't familiar with this site.
In the first part of this article she examines the demographics of MySpace users. She writes of a study conducted in late 2006 which found that “55% of online teens aged 12-17 have created profiles on social network sites, with 64% of teens 15-17” (p.3). She also speaks about the two types of non-participations: disenfranchised teens and conscientious objectors, with her analysis of this being very interesting.
For my first question, I wondered what the demographics were for this blog. How many of you have a profile on myspace and at what age did you join? For those who are “non-participants” on myspace, why is this? Can you place yourself within one of the two groups suggested by boyd- either disenfranchised teens or conscientious objectors?
boyd also comments on how insignificant the role that race and social class is, in terms of access to MySpace. Rather, “when it comes to social network sites, there appears to be a far greater participatory divide than an access divide” (p.3). In this demographics section, boyd also analyses how gender effects involvement on social network sites.
Boyd then goes onto write about the formation of social network sites, such as when MySpace was first launched (in the autumn of 2003) as a social network site who welcomed bands to join and create profiles, attracting music-loving fans to also join and follow their favorite bands. By mid-2005, MySpace had become a popular place for all types of American high school students (not just those with a music interest).
Boyd then describes how MySpace profiles are created, how friends are added and organized, and how the purpose of comments has changed over time.
Boyd then discusses the topic of the public. She writes “Social network sites allow publics to gather. At the same time, by serving as a space where speech takes place, they are also publics themselves.” (p.8). This follows with boyd suggesting four properties that “separate unmediated publics from networked publics” (p.9). These are:
1. Persistence: Social network sites enable asynchronous communication and extend the life of any speech act.
2. Searchability: Finding someone’s “digital body online” is as easy as a few keystrokes.
3. Replicability: Things can be copied easily online, so it is hard to distinguish an “original” “networked public expression” from a “copy”.
4. Invisible Audiences: We cannot tell just how many people will witness our expressions on social network sites. Offline, it is normally quite clear who is able to listen to our speech.
-can find this list on page 9 of the article
Does this list of four points alarm you about social networking sites? Or as a social networking site user, is this what you enjoy about social networking sites that you can’t experience anywhere else?
boyd also writes, “in short, a mediated public (and especially a networked public) could consist of all people across all space and all time. (p.9)While this is probably not going to happen at this time, this is an interesting point to think about!
Boyd then touches on the subject of participation. She believes that “teens often turn to sites like MySpace for entertainment; social voyeurism passes time while providing insight into society at large (p.10).
Can you think of any other reasons why teens might join Myspace and other social networking sites? What parts of a teen’s character lend themselves to be major participants in this type of culture?
Boyd then investigates how MySpace profiles are created, and how this act, is seen as an initiation process after first joining the site.
The article then goes onto speak about how identities are created online. Boyd writes “because of this direct link between offline and online identities, teens are inclined to present the side of them that they believe will be well received by these peers” (p. 13)
Does this suggest that social networking sites aren’t really liberating, but that teens are forced to act the same way as they do in the playground, online? Is this one of the flaws of social networking sites? Should they instead be a place for personal expression, where teens shouldn’t have to worry about who is acting ‘cool’, or not?
Boyd then discusses issues of privacy in regards to social network sites. She talks about the ability to change your profile to a ‘private’ setting, and the two common solutions teens undertake to avoid the watchful, concerned eyes of their parents.
Boyd concludes the topic of the private and public, with the following thought provoking sentences. “While the jury is still out on whether or not the Internet is democratizing, online access provides a whole new social realm for youth. Earlier mediated communication devices- landline, pager, mobile- allowed friends to connect with friend even when located in adult-regulated physical spaces. What is unique about the Internet is that it allows teens to participate in unregulated publics while located in adult-regulated physical spaces such as homes and schools. Of course, this is what makes it controversial” (p. 21).
What are your thoughts on the public nature of social networking sites? Is it the perfect place for paedophiles and the like, and therefore dangerous, and unsuitable for young people? Or does it give teens some sort of freedom while still being within adult-regulated spaces?
Boyd finishes the article by seeing the infatuation with social network sites such as MySpace by America’s youth as being linked to the way America’s culture is largely focused on celebrity worship. Boyd sees reality TV and popular dramas as a “magnified (and idealized) version of the networked publics that teens are experiencing, complete with surveillance and misinterpretation.” (p.22)
Do you think this is a compelling explanation for why teens are drawn to social network sites? Do you think teens enjoy networked publics, surveillance and misinterpretation? Or rather, they enjoy the social factor and convenience of social networking sites and have just have to work around the more undesirable features?
Hope those questions inspire some discussion amongst you, that’s all from me :)
16 comments:
1. I have a MySpace and Facebook, as well as a Hi-5 account I seldom use. I joined just after Year 12 in 2005. I think that was about the first year MySpace took off. Facebook I joined in early 2006 to keep in touch with one friend in the States. Before joining these sites I was very against them, having seen what a lot of online communities can do to people’s lives in real life… but it seemed to be the increasingly normal way to keep in touch, so onto the bandwagon I hopped. I have found my ‘social life’ to become a lot more fruitful, mostly because of the ease of getting in touch with someone and going “Hey, lets do something”. As much as people say social networking seems to disconnect us, I think that rather, it is bringing people together a lot more than we think. I therefore think I was probably a conscientious objector to begin with… but now, I don’t think I’d really belong in either.
2. All of these things definitely alarmed me to begin with, but not now… Now I love them! In terms of persistence, I love asynchronous communication as it becomes a way to keep in contact with anyone over a long space of time. Sometimes I find it hard to start up communication with someone I have not had contact with for a while. This ‘perssitence’ is almost like a never ending conversation of life. It makes things a lot easier. Searchability is probably a little scary because it is basically a search engine for people, but at the same time is very useful in some social situations and settings can ALWAYS be modified so you can be invisible on such search engines. Replicability is also a little alarming, but I think that this is mostly at the discretion of the user to be careful of what information they put out there and what information they accept and receive. Invisible audiences? Well, this brings up my gripes with ‘private profiles’ on social networking sites. If you aren’t prepared to have those invisible viewers, don’t sign up!
3. I believe that sometimes people turn to social networking sites for a life they are unable to create in real life. I have come across quite a few people whose actual friends are only those people they communicate with online. As a tie in with Boyd’s discussion of creating an identity. I think that some people who aren’t so accepted in the offline world, and can’t change the way they are to be accepted in the offline, go online to create that ‘accepted’ identity.
4. I don’t think that there will ever be a place for social expression where teens shouldn’t have to worry about the cool or uncool. I think those two binaries are going to be created wherever there is personal expression as one person prefers one sort of expression over another. I don’t really think that this suggests that social networking isn’t liberating. It is liberating. It is liberating in the way that people present themselves, in the way that people communicate and in the way that it allows things in the world to become much more accessible to people. Perhaps the most liberating part is this part about identity where someone can create an identity of which they think will be well received. As much as I disagree with doing this, it is liberating for the person doing it as it liberates them from the social boundaries they are presented with because of their offline identities.
5. I hate this notion that MySpace is a playground for pedophiles or anything of the like. At the end of the day the information that is put online is at the discretion of the user. Sure, there’s the old tagging dilemma on these sites but there is always an option to untag, and remove. The trick to social networking is knowing the sites features and options and making use of them to protect yourself or for that young person to protect themselves. If anything the problem with MySpace and social networking sites is more the internal exposure of things to youth people. I don’t think that such sites are appropriate for young people anywhere, mainly due to the fact that they become exposed to things they shouldn’t and implement that into their own lives. For example, my 13 year old niece decided it was cool to set her MySpace background up with pictures of various drugs and alcohol and pose in pretty slutty positions in her little training bra and undies all because she had seen it on other profiles. I think things like this are much more of a concern rather than pedophiles. I hate to sound like one of THOSE people, but parents need to have more control over their child’s internet use… and these pedophiles won’t have such a playground to play in!
6. Celebrity worship? I don’t think I have ever even been on a celebrity’s Myspace before! Maybe the appeal is getting a similar worship that celebrities get of yourself? Through picture comments, having a cool profile, being pretty/hot/ridiculously goodlooking people get this sort of worship from other users that they might find appealing… Personally I enjoy the social factor and don’t even realize these ‘undesirable’ features so yeah, I think they work around them rather than enjoy them… most of the users don’t even realize what they’re there.
Woahhhh.
I agree with you kylie, I used to be a conscientious objector...until more and more of my friends starting joining myspace and facebook, and I felt like I was missing out on something!
I also agree with what you said about bringing people together. Facebook and Myspace has enabled me to keep in touch with people from primary school who I probably wouldn't have ever seen or heard from if it hadn't been for social networking sites.
Does anyone disagree with what Kylie and I have both said?
It would be great to hear from someone who is against social networking sites, and why that is the case...
...and just to confirm, the question about celebrity worship is to do about how social networking sites (as suggested by boyd) could reflect the lives of celebrities- i.e. forever being under surveillance and scrutiny, criticised/heroised for rebellious behaviour etc
i clearly skipped that part. haha. i was trying to touch on that with social netowrkers being equated to social networking users.
hehe, no worries :)
I joined myspace around Year 12 too I think..seems ages ago I can't even remember haha. The only reason I joined is because all of my friends had one and I figured 'why not?' I also joined facebook late last year because I kept getting emails from people asking me to join...and same with bebo, and friendster(which I never use). I hardly ever use social networking sites unless I want to contact someone or I just get bored. It's interesting to see how much they've evolved - especially facebook, because now there's a million and one things you can distract yourself with on that site!
I think there is definitely a participatory divide on these social sites - if you don't have a profile, you're not really connected with anyone of your peers..and you're also pressured to join too.
I think social networking sites definitely have positives - theyre particularly useful for organizing meetings and stuff between your friends which is really hard to do with a mobile phone and few text messages here and there. I think social profiles have definitely become representative of someone's idealized self though - most people seem to construct their profile to emphasize certain traits and hide others. For example, I was on facebook earlier and got requested to use a 'top friends app' which basically lets you rank your friends from BFF to acquaintance...which I find kinda...I dunno...redundant? I mean seriously, I think that's why people hate myspace so much. The fact that so many people rank their friends kinda emphasizes the ego obsession people have on that site.
I work with a few people who are still in high school and they're obsessed with myspace - not facebook, which is strange because I always thought fb was more popular. Anyway, it seems the comment box section is also highly valued as a means to portray oneself/their personality...I know the people I work with comment each of their friends practically every day for the hell of it. There's also people who love decorating their myspace with images, videos and backgrounds(some of which are painful to view lol) but it only emphasizes how we use these social profiles to try to individualize ourselves and make our personalities/profiles "unique".
Social networking sites can be liberating - but I think it really depends on the person....if they choose to fit a certain mould or not. I think its great myspace allows some sort of creativity on the site no matter how neon/animated you make it...it still lets you express part of yourself.
The whole debate over paedophiles on myspace is definitely alarming, but its not to say parents and kids aren't responsible either. You definitely need to educate teens on posting information and images online, and once they know how to act online, it can be a pretty safe place.
As for celebrity worship...there is definitely a lot of that going around on the internet. I think most people join these social sites because of their friends though - and not because of tv shows or surveillance..? Being a fan of some show or musician is something which is part of these social sites, but ultimately the main reason I think these sites are so popular is because it offers a linked community which is convenient and lets you connect with all of your peers in an asynchronous fashion. People can actively seek out certain famous people's profiles(I came across a DJ AM/Travis Barker Myspace prayer page the other day where you could donate to some cause....what!? Around 700ish people had added them as their friend) but for the most part, you have to actively seek it. So in one sense - you can view sites such as myspace as drawing people because of its close relation between the producer/consumer(more interaction, more updates) but then again, social sites are not ALL about celebrity worship - but rather showing off your personality.
I love that just about every reading we have discussed in this unit has somehow managed to come back to the whole "online social networking" theme. Which is good, because it is a topic that I feel well qualified to talk about, and my understanding of fb allows me to engage with the readings a whole lot more than I might do otherwise :)
So: in response to a couple of the questions emily has proposed to us:
The main idea that I want to take issue with, is that of the "invisible audience." Emily wrote:
"We cannot tell just how many people will witness our expressions on social network sites. Offline, it is normally quite clear who is able to listen to our speech." When I first read that, I found it a bit of a creepy thought: really, we don't have much of a clue who might be nosey-ing over our profiles: sure, the privacy settings are enabled such that we can choose to make our profiles privately viewable only: but we still accept ridiculous numbers of friend requests from people that we wouldn't necessarily call "friends" in real life. So people who would otherwise be just acquaintances have access to personal details of our lives should they check out our profiles.
(On this note, one of my biggest FB gripes is when someone I've met once or twice add me as a friend) :P
But, THEN IT OCCURRED TO ME: isn't the fundamental point of the internet the concept of anonymity?! As internet users, we are inherently invisible users: we peruse sites to our own purposes and in most situations wouldn't need to assign ourselves a user identity or acknowledge to anyone else what sites we have been using.
So the concept of the "invisible audience" that initially repulsed me when I read it, is infact the very premise the internet is founded on. It's a form of socially accepted perversion really, isn't it?
i joined MySpace about 2 years ago, because all my friends had it and I felt like I was missing out on something if I didnt. And I was suckered in by the changing of the profile etc. I guess I am perfect prey for MySpace:) I no longer have a MySpace account as I have moved on to its more 'mature' sister Facebook. I cancelled my MySpace because I never used at and most of my friends were more active on Facebook. It is on this site that parties, events and other announcements are organised and I do feel that if I did not have it I would be missing out on information and invitations. I think there is definiatley a discrepency between the age group of the users. Facebook attracting people of any age, while mySpace is more directed at teenage girls.
On that topic, I feel the use of Facebook differs between male and female users. I find that my male 'friends' online are not as vigilent with checking their profiles and replying to requests. And that female 'freinds' are more likely to add all the applications sent to them to decorate their profile as mucgh as possible. Sterotypical I know.
In terms of going online to create an identity that would not be accepted offline or in the 'playground,' it is difficault to envisage a place where as a teen, you do not have to worry about what your peers think of you. in most cases your friends on your social networking pages are the same friends that you have a school or communuicate with in an offline environment. So these networking sites offer less freedom of expression when it comes to identity formation as the other users are familiar with who you are when you are not online.
Ps. In response to one of Emily's questions with regards to what draws teens to these sites is exactly what most of us a stated as our reasons for joining. All our friends were doing it and we didnt want to miss out. Who wants to be the teenager that isnt doing what all the others are doing? This permeates most people's teenage life, and I think participation in such networking sites is no different.
Can you think of any other reasons why teens might join Myspace and other social networking sites?
In little more than a year Facebook has expanded its global population to 62m users.A recent survey among American college students found that Facebook was the second most “in” thing, with beer and sex, after the iPod.It’s quite juvenile: you can “poke” people, or indeed “high five” them.You can browse other people’s friend lists, or befriend complete strangers. Not least among its many attributes, it allows users to snoop on boyfriends, girlfriends or exes who might be using Facebook to prowl for new conquests. Then Facebook offers you “apps” providing additional information and entertainment to keep you hooked. Users can send virtual gifts, take silly quizzes; they can join online groups such as “Am I the Only Person Who Likes Brittany ?” Social media is hot right now. I think a more relevant question would be," Can you think of any other reasons why teens would not join Myspace and other social networking sites?".
Can you think of any other reasons why teens might join Myspace and other social networking sites?
In little more than a year Facebook has expanded its global population to 62m users.A recent survey among American college students found that Facebook was the second most “in” thing, with beer and sex, after the iPod.It’s quite juvenile: you can “poke” people, or indeed “high five” them.You can browse other people’s friend lists, or befriend complete strangers. Not least among its many attributes, it allows users to snoop on boyfriends, girlfriends or exes who might be using Facebook to prowl for new conquests. Then Facebook offers you “apps” providing additional information and entertainment to keep you hooked. Users can send virtual gifts, take silly quizzes; they can join online groups such as “Am I the Only Person Who Likes Brittany ?” Social media is hot right now. I think a more relevant question would be," Can you think of any other reasons why teens would not join Myspace and other social networking sites?".
I'm on the adbusters site right now and I came across an article on the front page of this guy who quit facebook:
"Whatever the label, I was unhappy and feeling empty. The amount of time I spent on Facebook had pushed me into an existential crisis. It wasn’t the time-wasting, per se, that bothered me. It was the nature of the obsession – namely self-obsession. Enough was enough. I left Facebook. "
http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/80/quit_facebook.html
I think his article can be related with a lot of people...especially youths on myspace:P I mean for the most part I do think social websites are a means for showing off one's individuality...
opxThanks for Emily's presentation; as the popularity of Social Network Sites and its affects on teenagers' social life, it is interesting that to raise some of the issues to the surface.
I have joined facebook recently in order to remain the connections between my classmates in high school ad myself. There was a discuz! forum for each class thus I joined, discussed and "teased" with them. I think Boyd's ideas of disenfranchised teens and conscientious objectors can be shifted with those identities of the teenagers. A disenfranchised teen in real life would become a conscientious objector in virtual community, as they are easily to express for themselves. I think I may be the example of that.
The four points Boyd suggested I consider as a kind of "fun" for teenage users. As four points are consisting of some degree of rebellion, teenagers in SNS may consider as great challenges, things are impossible to be done in real life.
I think teenagers in SNS are developing the skills for socializing with people; and learning the politics of the SNS (thus explore to the real life), as they would do in the future. They are developing the managing skills for particular society they will enter in, from managing the conflicts to organsing the events. I think the social factor and convenience of social networking sites are more enjoyable for them, although a word 'cool' cannot conclude the social managemnt skills they learned from SNS.
Thanks for everyone's comments :)
I think you all have made some great points!
I think it is very true that most people join social networking sites, because that's what their friends are doing, and because they don't want to miss out on anything, and as kylie suggested, to keep in touch with friends.
I think another valid point made, was the way social networking sites (especially Myspace with the ability to change the look of your profile etc) are forums to express our individuality. But at the same time I think we only express our individuality to an extent- from my experience on social networking sites most people only express their interests and parts of their personality that are socially acceptable.
Has anyone got anymore thoughts on this?
Another good point raised was suggesting that usage is different between genders. I think this is a very valid suggestion. I have found more of my girl friends use social networking sites more often than my boy friends do.
Why do you think this is the case?? Why do you think girls seem to use these sites more often?
I guess there is a large amount of users of Social Network Sites such as facebook and mySpace are the girls. However, I think there are more numbers of males put their profiles on the dating websites (eg.Luvalife) as 18-30s are finding partners for dating or develop the relationship.
The reason why is that males are more likely to have common interrest in real-life, such as sports. They may spend more time on the competition rather than meeting each other in SNS. whereas girls are more likely needs comfort and care, which are delivered from their friends. Thus more girls often use SNS. That is my personal ideas of that. Please correct my idea if I gave a wrong explanation.
Post a Comment