Posts Tagged ‘Social Media’

My dog likes company.  I don’t know if he actually likes me, but he is happier when he’s near me. It can be a bother to have him constantly underfoot or wanting to ride shotgun on every errand, but I indulge him.  I could be flattered by his attachment, but I don’t trust the  judgment of a creature who is into butt-sniffing and pig ears. His affection isn’t personal, he’s a dog.  It is his nature to be a social animal, by default I am puppy posse.

Humans are social creatures too. It is our nature to crave contact with others or at least assurance we are not alone. How much contact we need or want, varies greatly from  person-to-person, but we are happier and healthier when we have people in our lives. Within each of us is the desire to be known and accepted.

The huge growth in popularity of Facebook is evidence of peoples’ desire to reach out to others.  The social media networks, provide a convenient and accessible way for us to stay in contact with people we may not regularly see.  Facebook is trending now, but people have always tried to stay connected.  Long before e-mail and txt messaging, people kept contact with the less efficient modes of letters, telegraph and the wired telephone.

Online interactions offer a relatively low-risk social outlet.  This is certainly one of the reasons many have greater ease with on-line dating or romance. Because cyber-communities, like MySpace and Facebook, make it easy to handcraft an image, children are warned about how people can misrepresent themselves as someone other than who they are. While this may be true of those who have ill motives, it doesn’t seem to be true of the rest of us.  Though most people go to some trouble to protect their online privacy, we are surprisingly overt in disclosing the details of our private lives.

How we feel about our self, determines how much, and what we want others to know of us.  Our degree of social comfort depends on our level of self-esteem, whether we are introvert or extrovert, and the degree of safety or anonymity. In online forums where we are not personally known, we may be less guarded and/or less honest, but on forums like Facebook, friends & family should serve to keep us more accountable. But the risk of raised eyebrows from those who know us best, is not enough to deter individuals from declaring their thoughts, feelings or likes and dislikes.

Social scientist, Sam Gosling has made a study of the ways in which people inadvertently show  their personalities.  His book “Snoop” is an examination of how people unintentionally show their traits.  Whether or not it is orchestrated, it seems people are prone to advertising who they are.  From the rooms we live in, to the music we listen to, we are constantly leaving clues to our personality.  One of the surprising things he discovered, was the accuracy of online profiles as a representation of the personality of that created them–suggesting again our desire to be known.

The personality we present to the world is a composite pulled from the mix of what we want the world to see and what we’d prefer to hide.  It is a tricky act to balance our desire to be known as we are, with our desire to be liked and accepted.  Though we may try to hide things we believe will bring about rejection, our efforts aren’t always successful.  Perhaps you have known someone who revealed a secret such as sexual orientation, an addiction, or some skeleton from the past, only to learn people weren’t very surprised by the revelation.

No matter what our social station or our esteem level, everyone of us is vulnerable to loneliness and rejection, yet it is impossible for people to get to know us if we keep our personalities hidden.  If we truly want others to get to know us, we have to face the vulnerability of showing ourselves.  It is a big risk, but necessary, if like my dog you’d prefer not to be alone.

A friend asks if I’ve noticed how boring Facebook has become.  Obviously, he’s not  reading The Wall Street Journal and Business Week, or he’d know Facebook is now bigger than ever.   But as we all know, bigger is not necessarily better.

I was once Facebook-resistant.  Picturing the same kinds of loners who once populated early social networks–aka the BBS bulletin boards, it was my perception that cyber-friends were a poor substitute for real friends.  Routinely, I received e-mail invitations from my real friends to join.
Ignore.
Ignore.
Ignore.
Delete.

When a particularly intelligent and vibrant friend, who surely had better things to do, sent me an invitation,  I could no longer resist.  I had to know why someone like him would be “facebooking”.  In a matter of days, I was connecting with people from all phases of my life.  I was chatting with friends and relatives in other cities, seeing the latest pictures of their children, and swapping bits & pieces of life.  Facebook was to people, what a pencil cup is to a desk–a convenient place to keep all within reach.

I did my share of quizzes, exchanged a few pokes and caught up with people I hadn’t spoken to in years, before realizing the usefulness of Facebook. I could organize a get-together, inviting all the people I wanted there, hire entertainment and never even have to pick-up the phone.  After the party, I could share all the photos without being bothered to make reprints.  Major time-saver, but that was only one aspect.

Facebook was like a never-ending cocktail party.  I could come early and stay late.  I could see who was there and make excuses to exit if things were dull.  Like Cheers, it was the place where everybody knew your name–fresh, friendly, live and intimate.

The  first 50 to 100 friends in my circle were people I knew pretty well.  That circle grew and spawned more circles.  Soon, circles were overlapping circles, which is exactly what is supposed to happen–except that to me it seemed the sociological equivalent of an environmental disaster–climate change.  With a small group of old friends, everyone could be completely unguarded.  The bigger the circle grew, the less intimate it became.

Then came the tweaks.  In response to growth, Facebook was constantly being modified.  There were tweaks to make Facebook better functioning for the growing volume of users.  There were tweaks in response to how “friends” use the site.  Realizing the size of this voluntarily-captive market, many adjustments were made to tap into the wealth of marketing information and to increase potential revenue. The never-ending cocktail party seemed to be undergoing a never-ending facelift.

In it’s early days, Facebook was just another on-campus group–like a friendly fraternity, but like it’s founder Mark Zuckerberg, it quickly progressed from university to big business.  It didn’t take long to realize Facebook users would tell advertisers what they liked and what they used; thereby suggesting what they were likely to buy.  Conversations between friends provided valuable marketing information to would-be advertisers.  Those who “liked” a page became a self-identified target audience already assembled to hear the next marketing message.  Facebook says tapping into this was a way of “personalizing” each user’s experience.  Nothing says “personal” like being bombarded with corporate messages, eh?

When I started thinking about whether Facebook was indeed less interesting, I was convinced it was evolving into something less attractive than it’s earlier form.  I suspected that as people’s networks grew, they would be overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information presented.  (Facebook tweaked that by using an algorithm to weed out people they thought might bore you.  When word of this got around, Facebook decided to again allow users decide for themselves who the boring people were.)

Having large groups of “friends” meant some people would be less likely to share the details of their lives and that the sheer volume of “friends” would limit the amount of quality dialogue that could practically take place.  It seemed inevitable, the more friends one had, the less “friendly” the atmosphere.  It was less personal.  Whereas, once it was mostly the friends you would have liked on speed-dial, the “friends” list was beginning to resemble the metropolitan white pages.

Would the depersonalization of Facebook signal the beginning of the end? It  hardly seems so.  People have always devised ways to connect with others.  In the 1930’s psychologist Jacob Saul Moreno,  realized the benefit and need of social connections and began trying to diagram models of how people formed social networks.  Throughout history, people have sought out affiliations with others who shared their interests or values.  Before Facebook, there were many online entities trying to help others connect.  Classmates.com and Six Degrees were two of the forerunners,but CompuServe, AOL and Prodigy were key in redefining the computer as a social outlet.

It would seem that no matter the forum, people have a primal need to connect with others.  Studies have shown, the quality and size of our social web, greatly influences both our sense of well being and our physical health and longevity.  Which means that the next time your spouse criticizes the time you spend online, you can reply, “Shut up, I’m trying to outlive you.”  (Not that you would,  I’m just saying.)

Incidentally, it is exactly comments like that one that could land you in divorce court–then again so could Facebook. The BBC recently reported that Facebook was implicated as a cause for 1 in 5 divorces in the UK.  One would assume this is because of the ease of initiating an affair online, but it is also probable such affairs would never occur, if good company were as readily available at home, as online.

I have come to terms with the fact that I am a “connector”.  No matter how many annoying modifications are made to my favorite social forum, I will probably still visit.  Just as AT&T, who once told us to “Reach out and touch someone“, is now losing market share because other companies have come up with better ways for us to stay in touch, when Facebook loses the qualities which caused its popularity, something else will likely displace it.  In the meantime, the rest of us will still go to Facebook when we need a lift–the face(book)lift.   

Facebook Factoids

1 in 13 people across the world use Facebook.

Facebook’s current population is roughly equal to that of the European Union.

48% of young people get their news from Facebook.

People talk to more people online, than they do in real-life.

The average user has 130 friends.

Extroverts have the most friends and the information on their profiles tends to be an accurate reflection of their personalities.

Shy people spend the most time on Facebook, but have tend to have fewer friends.

Women comment much more frequently than men.

Facebook’s heaviest-users (those under age 35) reportedly check their face book all day long, including while driving, while at work, while on vacation and  even after sex.

The average user creates 90 pieces of content a month.

My e-mail box was full of requests to be friends with people I thought were already my friends.

I was sure “social networks” were for people who didn’t have a social life–lonely hearts clubs for those without real friends.  In my mind, those sites were populated  by societal rejects whose only company was Oreo cookies.  In my head were visions of men who didn’t have a prayer of a chance of meeting women if they left their homes.

I ignored.  I resisted. I scoffed.  Then, I got a request from an old friend to whom I couldn’t say no.  How could I not be friend to a friend I was so fond of???

It was the first step on a slippery slope.  I added four or five people who had previously sent me requests.  To my surprise, they were keeping in touch with others I’d lost touch with.  I added them too.  In no time, I had a couple dozen new-old friends.

Catching up was more than just finding out what cities they lived in or what they did to put bread on the table.  I learned who had been divorced, who had been widowed, who had lost parents, who had lost children.  This thing I had so badly misjudged, allowed me to once again be able to share both the joys and sorrows of people I cared about.

Everyday, put me in touch with more people, whose presence in my life I had once valued.  There were the kids from summer camp, gals from the dorm at college, colleagues from my first job, and of course, there were family members scattered throughout the country.  I had found a way by which I could easily enjoy those connections–all at the same time.  I remembered how my mother had warned me about friends who would pull me into all kinds of unknown dangers, but I blame the owl.

My e-mail box was monitored by a virtual owl–I‘ll call him Hedwig. Each time someone Facebooked me,  Hedwig would notify me with a pleasantly beckoning hoot.   (Hedwig has requested I not use his real name.)  Whether or not I was on Facebook, my desk sounded like the area of an aviary where the really fierce birds of prey live.  Some people would have killed the owl and ignored the disruptions, but I could not.  Each time I heard the hoo-hooing of Hedwig, it was Pavlovian.  I had to know what he knew.

In time, I became fond of the continual sound of the great horned owl in my workspace–as did my visitors.

People began to believe I had become addicted to the social network known as Facebook.   If I protest too much, everyone will be more convinced than ever that I am in denial, but I swear it isn’t so.
Seriously, Facebook addiction?

No.

My problem is way more complex.  I am compulsively and pathologically sociable.  Some people like alcohol, or drugs, I like people.  Facebook provided non-stop opportunities for interaction.

So, my Facebook friend P.R. guru and blogger , David Kusumoto,  is, by necessity, a trend-watcher.  He often posts links & stats related to social networking trends.  From his page, I’ve learned many things about social networking.  Apparently, people are so addicted they check their Facebook first thing in the morning.  I do that, but never before coffee and only while I wait for the reporting of the previous days de blog stats.   I’ve learned that people check their Facebook after sex.  I’ve done that–but only because Hedwig and I are night owls.  I’ve learned that some people even check their Facebook in the car.  I do that too,  but who could blame me on long drives through the Mojave desert when the only thing to do is listen to Socialist poets on NPR or rebroadcasts of Tales from Rehab–The Woodstock edition.

It’s possible I have a problem, but I don‘t see it that way.  I am interacting with people–real people, people I know.  This makes it seem like a worthwhile diversion–compared to the hours friends spend playing Call of Duty with remote people or evenings spent watching people they don’t know on sur-reality TV.   I spend hours each day at my computer–most of it is spent expediting my life and /or writing–for me Facebook is the break at the water cooler.

Okay, I’m coming clean on one aspect of this . . I hate ropes, tethers, chains, cords and all the other things which would keep me tied down.  If I have an addiction it is to all the [finally] wireless things that simplify my life and allow me to stay connected anytime, anywhere.  If you want to see the ugly side of addiction, take away my laptop.