Blog for Comm 240

It’s Complicated: The Effect of Internet as a Communication Technology on Undergraduate Students, as Manifested in Social Networking Sites

Next year will be the 10-year anniversary of the first “true” and “popular” Social Networking (SNS): Friendster. Despite Friendster being largely usurped in the past decade by first MySpace and then by Facebook and Twitter (it’s pretty much non-existent in the US now), this 10-year marker is still a significant milestone. But why? Considering we were far too young to even be aware of Friendster, and fervently dismiss MySpace along with all of our other awkward middle school memories, how is this pertinent to our generation? Why should we even care about the effects of Social Networking Sites, let alone Friendster?

Because it is hard to imagine life before Facebook.

Friendster may be “dead” in the US, but its recalcitrant effects on the way we communicate today, and the resulting ripple-effect (manifested through sites like Facebook), cannot be ignored. Although this blog will focus primarily on Facebook and Twitter, the impacts of these two SNSs are not exclusive—any current or future SNS is applicable and relevant.

Before, however, I delve into the permeating effects of SNSs on society today, I will first explain what constitutes a “true” SNS, as well as provide some background information about computer mediated communication (CMC). According to lecture, in order for a website to be a “true” SNS, it must adhere to three tenants. Users must be able to: construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, articulate a list of others with whom they share a connection, and view and transverse their list of connections as well as other members’ lists within the network (lecture 5/10/11). As for CMC, there are five types: one-to-one asynchronous communication, many-to-many asynchronous communication, websites, synchronous communication, and hybrids. Social Networking Sites are hybrids, as they blend these types of CMC together. They are websites that provide you with the means for urgent (synchronous) communication, like instant messaging, as well as with forums for many-to-many asynchronous communication, such as Facebook groups and pages, and even for one-to-one asynchronous communication, such as Facebook messages or connecting an SNS to an email account (lecture 5/10/11).

What makes SNSs so significant to our society is not only their hybrid nature—which has transformed the very face and boundaries of communication—but also the fact that they have become inextricable from, and almost essential to, our lives today. This is partially due to the innovation of microblogging through the advent of Facebook. According to lecture, Facebook “changed the American blogging [and communication] experience” by limiting status updates to 420 characters. This revolutionized CMC, paving the way for the acceptance of Twitter’s 140 character limit for “tweets,” as well as sparking the entrepreneurial-esque SNS uses we are seeing today (for example, the use of Twitter in Egypt to organize democracy uprising and protests). Social Media has become more than a way to communicate—it has become a tool for living.

However (as discussed in lecture), in addition to providing an entirely new and dynamic outlet for communication, SNSs have also created a host of unique threats for our generation. Almost half of all teenagers do not place restrictions on their SNS information, which renders them vulnerable to identity theft from phishing (when “copycat” websites trick people into giving their information), property theft, and sexual predators. This decreased privacy also has possible negative effects on one’s career (lecture 5/10/11).

Yet the effects of Facebook and Twitter transcend character limits and security dangers—studies are revealing that their use and attitudes towards them may be affecting our psyche. Consider, for example, the concept of “creeping,” which often appears to be a harmless pastime, akin to checking one’s email. However, investigations have shown that “creeping” and the time spent on Facebook are detrimental to one’s self-esteem and academic adjustment (Kalpidou). In addition, another study has shown that “relational closeness” and Facebook communication frequency may be predicted by one’s feelings about self-disclosure and social connection (Ledbetter). In other words, a negative feedback loop might exist between self-esteem and social behaviors, and time spent and information shared on Facebook. Ultimately, Facebook and other SNSs are affecting our lives and the way we communicate drastically. Only with time will the true ramifications and what they mean for society reveal themselves.

References

Kalpidou, M., Costin, D., & Morris, J. (2011). The Relationship Between Facebook and the Well-Being of Undergraduate College Students. CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 14(4), 183-189.

Ledbetter, A. M., Mazer, J. P., DeGroot, J. M., Meyer, K. R., Mao, Y., & Swafford, B. (2010). Attitudes Toward Online Social Connection and Self-Disclosure as Predictors of Facebook Communication and Relational Closeness. Journal of Communication Research, 38, 27-53.