Social+Networks+and+Online+Communities

xkcd.

media type="youtube" key="lE-8QuBDkkw" height="344" width="425"[|Hamiltons Rule] Facebook and other social networks helps us connect to all types of different people. We can share information and photos with friends, family and people around the world that we may never even meet. Movements such as the women's rights movements or the civil rights movements, did not have these technology luxuries when they had to come together as a whole. Technology now allows us to come together and share and combine ideas and other resources with a group of people that we may know, we may not know or that have similar interests as us. Having these technologies allows people to come together and create subcommunities such as " Smart Mobs." **Smart mobs** are defined by Rheingold as organized bands of free riders. An example of this that he provides for us is sending messenges to people to tell them where to subway fare police are so that people could go to another location and ride for free. In the article Smart Mobs by Howard Rheingold, the combination of these new techonologies help maintain and create the **Collective Action Dilemmas**, which he defines as a constant balancing of self interest and public goods. However, when the smart mobs are cutting corners around the public goods everyone ends up using the resources and not giving anything back. This can invent the depletion of public goods since no one is giving back. A common example of this is with the tragedy of the commons. Where farmers use to take their cows to graze and since no one gave back to the commons eventually it was shut down because there was nothing left for the cows to eat there. The agruement against this is that people do come together to form a common goal and can be completed.

In Rheingold's reading titled "Smart Mobs" he talks about how community's are better off when the members of the community cooperate and work with each other rather than if the individual works to promote his own well being. Although the rewards may not be as high for each individual in that community, the community will prosper and function much better. He goes on and gives the example about how bees work together in the hive to promote the hives well being. He said that the goal of the hive is to support the offspring and future generations. The bees work hard to support the queen who has the offspring. This example got me thinking of how last semester one of my professor demestrated the example of Hamiltons Rule of altruism. He gave the example of two turkeys that were related to one another, and stated that they both were in persue of mates. The bigger and older turkey bob was able to gather 3 females on his own while his cousin tim could only get 2 females. The problem they faced was that bob had trouble defending against other male turkeys, so instead of tryin to hold just 3 females, he would team up with his cousin tim who would help him. Now because bob is older and bigger he gets all the females while tim defends. It may seem that tim is getting the bad end of this deal, but the real goal here is to promote future generations of their family. Tim would rather have bob mate with all the females than another random turkey mate with them. Rheingold aslo went on to say that groups or networks in the community work better when the groups are smaller in the community, because their is more trust and everyone knows one another.

Questions: -Is social networks helping or creating collective action dilemmas? -When and what will help get a person to contribute to resources versus just using all the resources? -With this widespread of communication what can a group of people acheive?





Most of the social networks we included are dominated by the age group 35-44, which was apparent in the first chart in this article. This group has become the most “social” age group out there. This is the generation of people who were in their 20s as the Web took off in the mid ‘90s. If we look at which age groups are the largest for each site, we get the following distribution: (http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/02/16/study-ages-of-social-network-users/)
 * 0 – 17: Tops **4 out of 19 sites** (21%)
 * 18 – 24: Tops no site
 * 25 – 34: Tops **1 out of 19 sites** (5%)
 * 35 – 44: Tops **11 out of 19 sites** (58%)
 * 45 – 54: Tops **3 out of 19 sites** (16%)
 * 55 – 64: Tops no site
 * 65 or older: Tops no site
 * The average social network user** is 37 years old.
 * **LinkedIn**, with its business focus, has a predictably high average user age; 44.
 * **The average Twitter user** is 39 years old.
 * **The average Facebook user** is 38 years old.
 * **The average MySpace user** is 31 years old.
 * **Bebo** has by far the youngest users, as witnessed earlier, with an average age of 28.
 * Mobile web users spend 45% of their time online sending comments on networking sites
 * 43% connecting with friends on networking sites
 * 40% sharing content on networking sites
 * 30% sharing photos



media type="youtube" key="sIFYPQjYhv8" height="340" width="560"

media type="youtube" key="_8_D451cHm4" height="344" width="425"

**What is an Online Community?**
In 1996 a multidisciplinary group of academics held a workshop at which they identified the following core characteristics of online communities : • Members have a shared goal, interest, need, or activity that provides the primary reason for belonging to the community. • Members engage in repeated, active participation and there are often intense interactions, strong emotional ties and shared activities occurring between participants. • Members have access to shared resources and there are policies for determining access to those resources. • Reciprocity of information, support and services between members is important. • There is a shared context of social conventions, language, and protocols.

Factors that affect the ease with which common ground is established include:
• sharing the same physical space, i.e., co-presence; • being able to see each other, i.e., visibility; • being able to hear each other and detect voice tone, i.e., audibility; • both partners experiencing the conversation at roughly the same time, i.e., co-temporality; • sending and receiving more of less simultaneously, i.e., simultaneity; • keeping turns in order, i.e., sequentiality; • being able to review messages, i.e., reviewability; and • being able to revise messages; i.e., revisability. (Online Communities: Focusing on sociability and usability)

While some of these aspects are able to be achieved in online communities and via social networking, some of the factors of establishing common ground and empathy are unavailable online, such as sharing the same physical space, and often visibility (although webcam interactions to occur).



=Social Gaming=

Online multiplayer communities are social networks built around multiplayer online computer games. Members of these communities typically share an interest in online gaming and a great deal of the interaction between them is technologically mediated. Typical online games can be played fairly independently, without seeking closer contact with other gamers. However, social interaction is a strong motive not only for playing multiplayer games, but also for forming lasting social relationships with other gamers, Siitonen says. Online games are based on the possibilities of computer networks. This shows in the scope of modes of communication that typical multiplayer games offer. A single game can support communication based on text, image, and sound. In addition, a game may provide tools for interaction between two people, as well as enable communication between whole groups and communities. In addition to using the modes of communication offered by games, members of multiplayer communities may keep in touch face to face, over the phone, via email, or in IRC, Siitonen explains. (How does online gaming affect social interactions?)

media type="youtube" key="c1LHfpKQ5vc" height="344" width="425"

media type="youtube" key="JN6oMF5uI5I" height="340" width="560"

Negatives to Social Networking Social networking can make a person feel a sense of invisibility that allows people to alter information about themselves. Since people may never meet some people that they talk to online they feel a sense of protection through the internet, because of these people may tell too much information about themselves. Some businesses and employers start doing a social background check on employees and people they may be looking to see how people portray themselves. People putting up pictures of them partying and drinking may not get a good review and can be the cause for not being hired. Others may reveal too much personal information about themselves which can be very dangerous to their personal safety. There has also been many cases where where people were cyber-stalked and cyber-bullying. In fact, cyber-bullying has become increasingly more frequent. Some of these cases of cyber-bullying end in tragedy where the victims commit suicide. Since this is a new event happening punishment for this type of action has not been established. A case of this would be the 15 year old girl from South Hadley, Phoebe Prince. She moved here from Ireland and starting attending South Hadley High School. She had dated a football player who was considered popular. And she was cyber-bullied by text messages and through Facebook messages and on her page calling people a slut. This continued to the point where this girl could not take it anymore and decided to take her own life. The girls who are responsible for cyber-bullying have been expelled from this high school and more may be as well. However, cyber-bullying has recently become more common and finding punishments for this is still too new.

media type="youtube" key="0AtsNyXFg7Y" height="344" width="425" (http://jessica142.wikispaces.com/Social+networking ) - A link to my added information on social networking.

So what questions do we have about social networking and online communities?
 * The first and most important question is, are the negative ramifications discussed (jealousy, bullying, and even cancer) legitimate concerns?
 * Do the negative aspects of social networking outweigh the positives, namely the ability to maintain close contact with friends, communicate political and philosophical thought, and announce upcoming keg parties at the touch of a few buttons?
 * Can online communities really exist as genuine ties and friendships, or are these sorts of interactions only causing a loss of the ability to actually interact in the real world?
 * Do people involved in online communities form genuine and long lasting connections with others in their community despite loss of face-to-face and often real-time interactions?