Assignment #7- For the Love of God... Literally!

One social network community on campus that I am part of is the e-board for a student based gospel choir. Every week we come together for fellowship and worship, bringing our woes, concerns, and joys to the forefront and having one another for spiritual support. Moreover, we incorporate our love for the Lord, praising him with our voices. For most of the semester we spend time practicing for our concert that is held at the end of the semester for all of Cornell community and for the ongoing engagements that we are invited to perform in.
As part of the e-board, I am the apprentice for the publicity chair. Hence, in addition to spending three hours every Sunday with all the members of the choir, I attend short e-board meetings after rehearsal to go over the logistics of the choir such as upcoming engagements, the funding progress, and wardrobe decisions. This Gemeinschaft, a community as defined by Haythornwaite, is very utopic being that we unite under the common ground of our religious beliefs. We have a shared focus combine our voices to make a beautiful ministry for whoever we are performing for. More specifically, the e-board has a shared focus to make sure that all events and sectors of the choir run smoothly. We all strongly identify ourselves as the leaders of the choir, understanding our responsibilities and working together to make the semester a success.
Being that all of us are all very busy, the e-board meetings are brief and a lot of communication relies heavily on the CMC of e-mail. We have a separate listserv from the general choir members to get our ideas across more directly and to come to a consensus about general concerns. Although it is asynchronous, without the use of CMC the e-board would not have as much strong ties as it currently does. Through e-mail we can address issues and questions immediately instead of waiting till the end of the week to discuss it in person. Being that the common ground factor is deeply established between us, everyone feels comfortable to bring up any question they may have, contributing to our strong ties with one another. This social network has evolved into such a circle of friends that at times our discussions might not be choir related but just occurs to help each other out personally, which demonstrates that we are there for each other.
The flow of information between us is much more effective with the help of e-mail. Our reciprocity, the ability to reinforce one another, is also at a very high level because we all have the same commitment to the choir and can openly communicate with each other about virtually anything.



COMMENTS:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=2366903668848083261

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=1736758392950167284

7.2 Brunswikian Facebook Interpretations

For this assignment, I decided I would use the individual-environment links Brunswikian Lens Model to help me analyze the personality of someone random on facebook. To pick the profile I would look at, I just clicked on the friends of my friends until I found one with a lot of information on it. I will call this guy Mr. F.

The four Brunswikian factors for individual-environment links are self-directed identity claims, other-directed identity claims, interior behavioral residue, and exterior behavioral residue. In a networking personal profile such as facebook, the self-directed identity claims are the things a person puts on their profile for their own personal sake. This could be a personal memento, or an inside joke or something else that the average outsider probably would not fully understand. The other-directed identity claim would be something a person puts on their profile that tells something about them aimed at outsiders. The behavioral residues are traces of activity from either the same environment (internal) or an outside environment (external) that can be seen within a person’s profile.

At first glance, it seemed like the majority of the information immediately available in Mr. F’s profile was other-directed claims. Everything in the personal info section would fall under this category. He listed (in great detail) his favorite bands, activities, movies, TV shows, etc. One part of this that gave a hint to an aspect of Mr. F’s personality was that he put “meeting new people” as one of his interests. This means that he probably has a somewhat extroverted personality. It was hard to find any self-directed identity claims in Mr. F’s profile. If I had to take one part of his profile and say it was self-directed, though, I would say that it is the favorite quotes section. A couple of these were philosophical in nature and pointed towards an agreeable personality type. There were other quotes in this section that were transcripts of pieces of conversations Mr. F had with his friends on AIM. These quotes are an example of external behavioral residue because they show interactions he had with other people in an outside environment. Despite the quotes being somewhat funny, they did not help me form any perceptions about Mr. F’s personality. Another form of exterior behavioral residue was the pictures section of Mr. F’s profile. Each picture showed Mr. F in a world that wasn’t facebook, and therefore and external one. The vast majority of these pictures were of Mr. F partying and drinking, and generally having a good time. This furthered the impression I had of him being an extroverted person, since he was always in a crowd of people and apparently having a good time. He had also posted some pictures of him on vacation with his family and an album of him doing volunteer work at a senior citizen community. While the vacation did not help identify any personality factors, the volunteer work made me think Mr. F was more agreeable and maybe open as well. Finally, the most obvious example of internal behavioral residue was in his news feed. This gave traces of past interactions Mr. F had with other people in facebook, such as adding friends and making wall posts. Unfortunately there was nothing much in the news feed that gave me any more impressions about Mr. F’s personality.

Overall, I got the impression that Mr. F was a fairly extroverted person, and probably a little on the agreeable side of things as well. I would say that the best factors to look at when analyzing someone’s profile on facebook would be the behavioral residue factors. Because these are recordings of previous actions, they are less likely to be created by the person for the reason of making themselves look good. They are probably assessment signals, and harder to fake than the conventional signals a person can easily edit in their profile.

comments:

Stalking a Vampire Friend

The "Art" of Friendship

7.1 An Online Message Board Community

A few years ago, I belonged to an online community that was connected through a shared interest in graphic design and interactive media, utilizing programs such as Photoshop, Flash, and Illustrator to create casual art or humorous/satiric pieces of media. We communicated mostly through the message boards on the website, with such thread topics as “Photoshop this picture,” “Virtual Graffiti” (where each person adds a new section to an ongoing JPEG file, just like a real graffiti wall, such as this one), and “Flash Puzzles” (in which you post a simplified Flash-based puzzle for others to solve – this one is probably one of the best examples of this). Besides threads about media creation, members would often post tips or tutorials to help other members of the community, or talk about meeting together in other online environments, such as in online games or collaborating on a project for online contests, such as on Worth1000.com.

Our online community was relatively tight-knit, compared to some of the current flame-ridden online spaces of today. Members generally supported each other, helped one another, and participated in external activities with each other. As in any online community, there are, of course, a few “bad seeds” that went against the majority of the community, but the website’s relatively strict code of conduct and highly active moderators usually kept the community in balance.

The definition of a community as described by Etzioni and Etzioni appropriately illustrates our group: it was defined by a social network that contained a web of relationships in which members bonded with each other, our culture was characterized by the basic elements of common ground, such as a commitment to a set of shared values, mores, meanings, and a shared historical identity. Our community was also defined by reciprocity, as members reinforced one another, especially if they needed help with a project – in fact, an entire section of the message boards was set up as a help section, where members could often find answers to whatever questions they may have had, even if it had nothing to do with media design. Members often bonded with one another – the relatively small size of our community allowed the most active members to stand out and be referenced by name in threads where they weren’t even participating, such as one particularly long and memorable thread on the community’s favorite moderators and contributors.

The leanness of CMC may have facilitated having such a rich community with a distinct group synergy. It allowed for everyone’s opinion and contribution to be heard in an asynchronous environment, where other members could take their time to come up with their best responses. This may have been helped by the selective self-presentation and impression management that is defined by CMC. In addition, the fact that everyone in the community was geared toward the same general goal to exercise our skills in media design created a social environment more like the one described by Gemeinschaft rather than by Gesellschaft – it was more along the lines of a Utopic community based on a shared focus and common purpose that contained strong interpersonal ties and a common language and identity. Through our active, and generally positive, participation, we created a community that was connected through social activities in which members were highly supportive and intellectually engaged.

Comment 1
Comment 2

7.2 Stalking a “Vampire” friend

For this assignment, I will use Brunswikian Lens Model to analyze the Facebook profile of a new friend I met through Vampires (a decision I soon regret since her profile goes on for pages and pages).
We added each other as friends so that we can have more people to “bite” with and earn more point to get our creatures closer to the next level—it’s kind of like a pact between players of these supernatural creatures game on Facebook. I will call her L for this blog (not to be confused with L from a certain famous manga series).

First, some technical stuff. According to Brunswikian Lens Model, “environmental cues function as a lens through which observers make inferences about the underlying characteristics of a target”(Walther, 6). If a cue accurately reflects a target’s underlying personality characteristics, that cue has cue validity. Since we are cognitive misers and don’t use all the cues available to us to form impressions and make judgments, the level of usage of a cue in forming an impression is called cue utilization. And when we have both cue validity and cue utilization, we have functional achievement – we would have accurate judgment of the target. In other words, if we use a valid cue, we can pin point the target’s personality. Also, the model focuses on four mechanisms that link individual to an environment they inhabit: Self-directed identity claims, Other-directed identity claims, Interior behavioral residue and Exterior behavioral residue.
Self-directed identity claims are “symbolic statements made by occupants for their own benefit, intended to reinforce their self-views”(Walther, 7). In other word, self-directed identity claims are there for the creator him/herself. She has many photos of her, her friends and her families (dance party, trip to the beach, etc). These are her memories hold special meanings to her. There was also this photo of this painting. Many of her friends were tagged on an empty corner. It’s possible that it’s something special too. The most significant – though only a few word – would be that she is engaged. I guess she would always like to be reminded of this happiness.
Other-directed identity claims project an image of how the creator wants to be viewed by others. She has pages of different gifts and bumper stickers from her friends, showing that her friends are not just a statistical number in Friends in Other Networks. (Though her low number of wall posts suggests otherwise, I suspect that it’s because people can’t find her wall in her profile). Her About Me is very general – basically she likes everything in many categories with only a few exceptions and that she is or was between jobs. She displays her creatures (all Level 5) on the right-hand side of her profile (takes a lot of space), displaying her power and making everyone think: how, in the name of God, did she get all those points?
Interior behavioral residues are “physical traces of activities conducted in the [immediate] environment”(Walther, 7). In this case, this would mean a record of everything she did on Facebook. A good example of this would be the News Feed (or Mini Feed on the profile). L’s Mini Feed, unlike that of many of my other friends, is not collapsed. As far as the eye can see, it’s filled with Vampire, Zombie, Werewolf and Slayer battle records. My guess is that she leaves the LONG Mini Feed open because she wants to know when and by how much her creatures progressed. In other words, she is hooked on these Facebook games.
Exterior behavioral residues are residues of things done outside of the environment in question. The most obvious example would be photos – the dances and acts in which she performed on stage, trips to the beach and to what seems to be Salem, Massachusetts.
In conclusion, I analyzed L’s Facebook profile using the Brunswikian Lens Model and formed a fairly good impression of her. Now, I shall try to summarize her personality using the Big Five Traits--neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. She seems to be high on the openness and extraversion scale as demonstrated by the shear volume of data on her Facebook. Judging from the number of friends she has and the amount of stickers/gifts she received, she is very agreeable. And from the thousands of points on her creatures and the fact that she leaves her Mini Feed open to check her creatures’ progress even though the creatures news take a lot of space, I would say she is pretty high on the conscientious scale as well. As for neuroticism, judging from some of her weird pictures, I would give her a 7 on the scale of 1 to 10.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=8719922356311933996
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=7840426746768611277

7.2 | A little too much Facebook

In an attempt to achieve functional development, I analyzed a “friend’s” Facebook profile with an abundance of environmental cues. What do I consider an abundance of environmental cues? A Facebook profile with over 800 pictures, 30 photo albums, 40 applications, 150 groups, 700 friends, and 1000 wall posts. The “Personal Information” section is also fully expressed, with a 1500 character limit for each of the major categories. This is one of the most elaborate profiles that I have encountered (yes, not THE most… I know someone with over 8,000 wall posts). Because more information is readily available, there is a better chance of having certain cues that are valid for impression formation (cue validity). In addition to the abundance of information, I also chose this person because I have no real face-to-face interaction with (the last time I saw this person was 10 years ago). I will refer to my friend as “D.”

96% (or so) of D’s profile is composed of other-directed identity claims. D’s profile was designed to make others perceive her in a certain way. Other-directed identity claims can be seen in D’s pictures: D tries to conceive an image of a girl who is very popular, very sophisticated, and very physically attractive. It is obvious every single one of the 850 photos is used to portray this image; all the pictures were of her posing, dancing, enjoying company, doing community service. These pictures were also followed by many comments that are directed towards her audience, people viewing her profile, such as, “not many pics yet...many more to come.” There are no candid pictures of her or pictures of her with less attractive people. Her process of tagging, commenting, and untagging of photos can be described as basking in reflecting glory and cutting off reflecting failure.

Another example of other-directed identity claims are the Groups and Personal Information section. The groups, such as Stand Up Against Police Brutality, I Bet I Can Find 1,000,000 People Who Just Want Peace, Justice for the Jena 6, are geared to portraying the same image of a well-rounded girl. Although she might possibly care about some of these issues, it is unlikely that she has enough time to be an active contributor to each of the 150 groups. The main purpose of these groups is make statements to others on how she would like to be perceived. The personal information is also serves a similar purpose, as she is very detailed in her description, and once again, her diction is geared towards an audience. Other-directed identity claims contribute to a majority of D’s profile, whether it is through photos, groups, or descriptions.

There were traces of self-directed identity claims in her applications that she chose to install. Instead of trying to make an image of how others should perceive her, she installs applications that reinforces her values and self-view: the Causes application and the Greek community application. Although this might also contribute to her image perceived by others, the main purpose of these applications is to remind herself of her own values. Her active involvement with these organizations and causes prove that these are not merely gimmicks to portray an image to others.

The Newsfeed is a record of the interior behavioral residue that D leaves behind. This Newsfeed is also an example of an environmental cue; it shows all the activity of the user. People who view this have a good idea of her interior behavior, both past and future. D’s Newsfeed suggests that she is very active, with an average of 10 items a day, and one can be certain that D will have future interior behavior.

Exterior behavioral residue is also very evident in D’s profile, particularly her photos and the wall. I have already how her photos played a large role in her profile and how they exhibit past experiences outside of Facebook. The wall also shows conversations that make references to experiences outside of Facebook. The wall made it possible to assess D’s personality much easier because other people’s views of her are more accurate cues than what she is trying to portray herself. This can be seen in Walther and Parks’ experiment:

“The results are consistent with Walther and Parks’ (2002) warranting hypothesis. The warranting principle suggests that other-generated descriptions are more truthful to observers than target-generated claims.”

The main source of my analysis of her personality came from her friend’s comments. By looking at several pages of comments, I have come to understand that D is in fact an extremely agreeable and extraverted individual. Virtually all her friends’ posts were positive, expressive, and sincere:

“d....first off i miss you sooo much and i was thinking about you today, second off you look straight up sexyyy in your picture =) i love youuu

i love how it takes me 5 hours to scroll down to post on ur wall
ur pic makes me drool :)

As long as the wink follows.. youre money.

You are absolutly amazing!!!! and I love you more...xoxo

deee!! i think you're awesome...just thought i'd tell you!

D u r so hot..... i love u =)”

It does not seem that D is controlling her comments in her wall like she was in her photos because there were 2 very offensive and derogatory comments. This shows for the most part that most people believe D has physical attractiveness, task attractiveness, and is creditable.

The Brunswikian Lens Model applies very well to D’s Facebook profile. The validity of her friend’s comments (cue validity) and the abundance of available information (in order to make linking possible) (cue utilization) allowed me achieve functional development. Other-directed identity claims through photos, groups, and descriptions; self-directed identity claims through applications; interior behavioral residue through the newsfeed; and exterior behavioral residue through the wall—were all environmental cues that were very apparent in D’s profile, which lead me to the conclusion that D was an agreeable and extroverted person.

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/72-yet-another-method-of-stalking-on.html

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/7-she-likes-to-party.html

7. Gaming Community

About 4-5 years ago, during my high school years, I was very involved in an online community surrounding an online PlayStation 2 video game. This community is a great example of a social network as discussed in Haythornwaite’s paper on the topic. One very interesting aspect of the community is that Gemeinschaft (community) and Gesellschaft (society) were applicable on multiple levels. One might think of the people who play this game as the Gemeinschaft and the rest of society as the Gesellschaft, however, one could also look at the specific community that I was involved in as the Gemeinschaft and the group of the people who play the game as the Gesellschaft. There were distinct aspects to this smaller community, which made it unique within the group of all players of the game and therefore made the idea of a community within a community true.

(I feel it is important to explain why I chose to categorize the group of all people who played the game as a society versus the group of people connected in this smaller subset as the community. First, the group of all players was significantly large: millions of individuals, of which only a few thousand belonged to the smaller community. Secondly, despite the fact that individuals were placed on teams within the game, if players were not with any acquaintances they would often work only for their own benefit, rather than for the good of their team.)

The small community that I took part in was a website discussion board that was dedicated to connecting individuals and groups (clans) who played the game. Active members visited the forum daily and quickly made friends and gained reputations. The interactions within the community formed relationships, which caused more frequent interactions. Reciprocity among members went beyond the web site. One feature of the game that we all played was the ability to keep a list of friends in game so we could find them and play together. On a daily basis members of this forum would gather to play the game with each other; often multiple separate groups of members could be found together working towards the game objectives. The common ground that brought people to this community was the interest in the game that we all played, however members often found other common ground to connect with other members. Discussions included the game, other games, politics and anything else that any member wanted to discuss.

This community was based in CMC, both in game and out of game on discussion boards. However, there were a few cases of groups of individuals from within the community meeting in real-life. The online/offline synergy was very interesting in these cases. Often people of different races, cultural groups and ideologies who would not generally associate with each other in real-life found that pre-existing friendships through CMC broke the barriers that would have kept them apart.

Comments:
7.1 | The Secret Life of Mac Users
7: Get ready for your eurotrip!

Assignment 7- Option 1 - My Community

I am in a fraternity. By its nature, I am very close to the other members of my fraternity. We exhibit what Tonnies would describe as Gemeinschaft. We are "a collective based on strong interpersonal ties, face-to-face interaction, a shared focus and common purpose, language and identity, all largely associated with an ideal of the pastoral village." Assuming you change the pastoral village to a fraternity house, that is almost an exact description of what a fraternity consists of.

I live in my fraternity house. We are able to live together because we share common ground. Rush and pledging made sure that we fit in with the group that we were joining. Although we are all of different backgrounds, and have a wide variety of majors, we share common goals, ideals and interests. Our shared focus and common purpose is to create a smaller community at Cornell where we can thrive, to create a house that will survive for many years and allow future members to reap the benefits, and to uphold the same values as our other chapters.

There are arguments in Haythornwaite both for how online communication can help and how it can hinder communities. If anything, I would say that CMC helps our community. An important part of our house is our alumni. While some live close enough to meet face to face, most do not. Without CMC we would not be able to communicate as easily with our alumni who besides offering financial support can offer advice and share past experiences. The fraternity is a community with a large social capital. I can trust the other members and can gain new connections that I would not have had otherwise.

CMC does not just help with older alumni. It allows us to stay in touch with recent alumni. While people do not really leave the community (they are still members, even when they graduate), the people that we can have FTF communication with changes every year with new members coming in and old members moving away. In addition, most members that are still at Cornell do not stay during the summer and winter, but we still need to stay in touch. CMC allows for communication during those months that FTF communication is not possible.

SNA shows that we exhibit characteristics of social capital. We share common ground, networking, and reciprocity. Although the community could continue without CMC, CMC allows us to be stronger and to use the community to its full potential.

7:1: A Community Protests a Community Divided

As many of you have probably heard, the imminent construction of Milstein Hall has displaced a number of architecture students from their humble abode of Rand hall to a location 2 miles off campus in downtown Ithaca. I happen to be one of these displaced architecture students. We were notified by email about the displacement only 2 weeks before the semester started. Sitting at home, getting ready to head back to Cornell for another semester we were all shocked, and we had to find an outlet for our feelings - Facebook. Someone promptly created a group, and an invitation was extended to all Cornell architecture students listed on Facebook. The group grew exponentially and explosively, and nearly bridged the gap between synchronicity and asynchronicity.

Our online group called “AAP [never] @ Esty Street” fits closely with Haythornwaite’s definition of Gemeinschaft (community) and has the characteristics of an egocentric network. Our strong interpersonal ties are founded in our “shared historical identity” (Etzioni & Etzioni): common ground of experiences in Rand Hall, mutual friends, professors we all know, and the disturbing news of the displacement. This identity is so strong that the social sphere of architects is often referred to as a cult. The “actors” directly involved in the displacement are those currently enrolled; we are like a family, held together by strong ties. The alumni in the community are weak ties. They are known by very few “actors” in the community, but they have unique historical advice to offer about negotiating with the Architecture department (this displacement situation is not unlike others in AAP’s past). A series of wall posts, messages, and notes from our Facebook group allowed us to voice our opinions to one another and form a comprehensive set of demands that we could all agree upon. The formation of this document was built through the Etzioni & Etzioni’s concept of reciprocity, where our common concerns were reinforced by one another. In fact, the formation of this web of relationships enabled each of us to bond with all the other people in the community, to the point where the group even augmented our concerns.

Our social network built on common ground and reciprocity resulted in increased social capital. By the time school started we had already organized and responded to the administration as a student body, rather than a few scattered complaints, which would have occurred without the formation of the CMC-based virtual community. CMC made it easier for us to assemble once we were back at school. For example, an offline meeting was announced online to all the members of the group only a day before the meeting time. Date, time, and location information is perfectly suited for lean media, and there was quite a showing at the offline meeting. It is important to note that though CMC helped unite the community, without real-world interaction following the creation of the community, the group would have fallen apart. Etzioni & Etzioni states that “support in multiple modes is likely to have the best community outcomes. In the real-world meetings, we could tell who was really devoted, and who was just part of the online group to show virtual support. Since we were all sitting at the same table eveyrone’s comments were given the same amount of attention, whereas online, not all of the wall posts were read or responded to. All in all, the online group prevented downtime by connecting the actors constantly, thus synergizing our operation to hold together a community threatened by physical dislocation.

See http://cornell.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4234599151 to view “AAP [never] @ Esty Street”

------------------------------

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/72-through-brunswikian-looking-glass.html
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-pumpkin-palooza.html

7.2: Yet another method of stalking on Facebook

In the Brunswikian Lens Model, we make judgments about another person’s characteristics by taking whatever cues we are given in the particular environment and using them to draw conclusions the personality traits and aspects of the person. Cue validity is how accurate a particular cue is in determining a target’s traits, and cue utilization is the level to which a particular cue is used in forming an impression. When these two things occur at the same time, it is called functional achievement; we are making an accurate assessment of the other person. On a Facebook profile, if we rely on a particular interest that a person lists to make a judgment about them, and it is actually a valid interest of theirs, then we have reached functional achievement.

The individual to environment links that the Brunswikian Model explains are described through four mechanisms. In examining these I looked at the Facebook profile of my friend’s boyfriend who I have not met yet. Self-directed identity claims are made by the person for themselves. They exist to strengthen their own self-image. “Charlie” belongs to a Facebook group called “Dominican College Students – Estudiantes Dominicanos.” This group works to underline how he views himself as a Dominican student, and helps him connect with that part of his personality. Other groups about being in the Ivy League, growing up in New York City, and attending public school also serve similar functions. All these things are evident to other people through the personal information and education he lists on his profile, but being part of the group helps him reinforce it for himself. Other-directed identity claims are the parts of the profile that are fashioned to project a certain image to the people viewing the profile. He displays the “Baseball Fan” application to show his Facebook friends that he is a loyal Mets fan. Also, certain groups he is a part of aim to get some sort of message across to people, such as “Join Breast Cancer Awareness Month” or “Facebook is turning into MySpace and I’m not liking it.”

Internal behavior residue is a record of past behavior that provides cues in the current environment. On Facebook, this is seen through the News Feed and the Mini Feed. On Charlie’s profile, his Mini Feed tells me what he wrote as his status over the past 3 weeks, as well as changes to his profile and groups he has joined. I can assess the type and level of his involvement in this online community. External behavior residue is the result of activities engaged in outside of the environment, in this case, outside of Facebook. Pictures posted months ago still show up on profiles and can be cues as to how a person might act in the future. On Charlie’s profile, I can see pictures posted from a trip he took with his girlfriend to NYC a few weeks ago. They show them having a good time and being happy together. This makes me infer that they go well together and will continue to get along.

Even though I haven’t met Charlie, I have already created a fairly robust impression of him using the four mechanisms of the Brunswikian Lens. In assessing personality, neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness are the big five traits. In analyzing Charlie’s profile, I agree with Hancock and Dunham that openness and conscientiousness are the most visible traits over CMC. Charlie was very open about his likes and dislikes through his 81 groups and the interests and applications he lists on his profile. I felt he was conscientious, because although he had a wide variety of aspects of his personality and lifestyle on his profile, he did not have obvious things that could reflect negatively on him. From talking to my friend about him, I know that he goes to parties, but he is careful not to have any incriminating pictures of himself. However, his extroversion, neuroticism, and agreeableness are very difficult to judge having only looked at his Facebook profile. I would guess that he is very agreeable, slightly neurotic, and highly extroverted, but I am less confident in these than my assumptions about his openness and conscientiousness.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=2300652280304839693

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=5016108074670533420

7 Team Bonding

The community I decided to describe this week is intercollegiate club gymnastics. This community is a combination of student athletes (male and female), coaches, and judges from across the country. The Cornell Club Gymnastics team has its own social network (comprised of team members and our coach) and is also apart of the larger intercollegiate social network (comprised of other college teams, their members and coaches, and judges). These social networks can be considered as a classic Gemeinschaft. It is based on strong interpersonal ties (communication is essential for group cohesion and for arranging competitions); it has a shared focus and common purpose (gymnastics); and it has a common language (terminology that might be confusing to people unfamiliar with gymnastics). This makes it easy for everyone to connect (physically, intellectually) allowing for more social activities (competitions, banquets, fundraisers, etc).

The social network consists of strong and weak ties that exist FtF and in CMC; this combination of media is an example of Etzioni and Etzioni (1999) synergies. The ties within each team are very strong with frequent communication spanning almost all spaces (FtF, phone, email, IM) about practice times, fundraisers, and team events. This network is dense because of the close and frequent contact the actor’s have with one another. Members of the team obviously go to the same school, practice with each other, and probably hangout outside of the gym. This means that they have a lot of common ground in their commitments to school and gym. Ties between teams are somewhat weak, with communication limited to mainly email, occasional phone calls to schedule or confirm upcoming events, and actually meeting at the events. This weak tie adds variety and range to the network because they are from different universities and offer different resources. However, the actors’ common commitment to gymnastics makes the social network more salient; we all just want to do gymnastics and have fun competing, there isn’t much tension or stress.

This community involves the use of social capital extensively. Human capital (skills, knowledge, and judgment) is used to determine team representatives (captains) that typically communicate with one another, and it is also used to determine the credentials of coaches and judges. Teams constantly mobilize their resources (contacts) to exchange information and exert influence on future events (locations, times, etc). They invest time/money/support into events and event planning by informing teams of the event and reserving judges and a place to compete (with equipment). This investment in social relations also has an expected returns (reciprocity), in which a team may host a meet earlier in the season and then another team hosts one later so the same team isn’t always sponsoring an event. For example, a different team hosts nationals every year.

This example of a community can answer the question posed by Haythornwaite - how can a community exist without physical co-location? It can exist through the use of various media (phone, email, IM, etc) to mobilize resources and use your contacts to achieve a particular purpose (like arranging a competition). There are on- and offline synergies present in this community. Because the teams are spread out across the region/country, it is more convenient and quicker to correspond via CMC. The leanness of CMC can actually support the richness of a community by connecting members across time and space; while FtF meetings require planning and scheduling a time/place to meet weeks in advance, CMC meetings can be an on going discussion where you can leave thoughts and ideas freely (without the time constraints of a FtF meeting). These online synergies are then transferred to offline synergies when teams meet in person before an event to help set-up or at general body meetings to discuss policies, future engagements, etc.

-----------------------------

Comments

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-blue-fins-diving.html

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-womens-soccer.html

7.2: Hot friends can only make you look so good

For this assignment, I am choosing to use the medium of -- surprise -- Facebook! Because I think it is easier to get an impression that is reliant on CMC cues, I will analyze the personality of someone who I have not actually met. For the sake of anonymity, I will refer to him as S.

In order to assess S's personality using the Brunzwikian Lens Model, I have to determine the enviornment which will act as my lens through which I will view S's personality characteristics. As earlier stated, this enviornment is Facebook, a website in which people largely are able to manipulate the information present, although some key elements of the profile are enacted by others. Those elements, as seen in Walther's experiment, can play an important role in the guest's perception of the target's facebook page. In this case, I will try to reach Walther's "functional achievement" by determining whether the cues presented by S seem to be valid, and by utilizing those cues in a way that links the Facebook enviornment to my own interpretation of the cues.

Off the bat, S's profile seems pretty average, maybe trying a little to hard to impress. The reason I deduce this is because in his profile picture, he is holding a smoking hooka-- not necessary. However, this assumption that he is trying to hard is probably not valid because it only represents a small part of the person he is presenting, and doesn't take into account any of the other aspects of his profile, much less his personality.

More important than my first impression, however, are the four mechanisms defined in Walther's Facebook Study pertaining to the Brunswikian Lens Model. By viewing his other-directed identity claims, largely the information in his "about me" section and his other areas of interest, we can find out S's hometown, email address, and a few interesting quotes which speak of his interest in funny movies. Under his Activities, however, there is a statement which doesn't seem to make sense. This particular aspect of his "about me" might, then, fall under Walther's category of self-directed identity claims, a difficult mechanism to find in Facebook. However, the undiscernable nature of his statement could be an inside joke, and thus an identity claim that is not directed at others, but at himself. This indicates to me that S is at least a somewhat social individual, since he seems to be making references to friends. As for S's interior behavioral residue, we can turn to the groups he has joined. Such groups are reminiscent of his internal activity on Facebook, as well as his personal news feed. The groups he is in present him as relatively well-rounded. He is in both academic, sports, and social groups. His news feed indicates that he spends some small amount of time on Facebook, and that the time he spends is mostly dedicated to making new friends, thus enhancing our view of S as a social individual. Lastly, we can examine S's exterior behavioral residue. A great example of this mechanism on Facebook is seen through the "photos tagged of S" section of S's profile. This area contains pictures from the football game and pictures taken with other attractive people, which according to Walther would make S appear more attractive to viewers. I can't say that my personal experience was in accorance with Walther, but maybe S wasn't at that level of "average" attractiveness that Walther used in his study. Maybe having hot friends can only help you get so far.

Overall, I understood S to be relatively open to experiences, maybe conscientious, extroverted, agreeable, and not very neurotic. My impression was based on the small amount of information I was able to garner from his facebook profile and thus, my statements are likely not very accurate, especially those regarding conscientiousness and neuroticism, becuase those traits are less easily detected in a CMC medium.

7.1: Pumpkin PALOOZA

In the Haythorhwaite article, he describes a community as being a web of affect laden relationships. These communities demand commitment, a shared sense of culture, an a shared set of values or dogma. Within the community, relationships will often overlap, and when they do, the bonds between members are reinforced. Using the Social Network Analysis, the properties and characteristics of communities can be evaluated by examining three main aspects of social capital, which are common ground, networking, and reciprocity.

Facebook is a social computer-based network that connects from all over the world. Within the Facebook network, people become “friends” to view each other’s profiles and contact each other. Through mutual friends, events, groups, and real life contacts, people develop personal networks. What I want to focus on are groups within Facebook. In particular, a group I belong to, called Pumpkin PALOOZA.

This group is a virtual community that creates awareness and promotes a philanthropy event sponsored by my sorority and the fraternity we are partnering with. The features of this group include pictures that allow for visualization of the event, 115 group members, a wall to leave comments on, and information regarding the event.

According to Haythorwaite, there are social networks made of actors. Actors relate to each other through ties, both strong and weak. In Pumpkin PALOOZA, people with strong ties are the people coordinating the event, and good friends of those coordinating the event. Most people with strong ties have met face to face in both social settings and philanthropy planning meetings, and have communicated via email and instant messaging. People with weak ties would be considered those who have heard about the event and expressed interest, whether it be through a flier, word of mouth, or from a Facebook group invitation from a current member. Networking is a large factor in reaching actors with weak ties.

By looking at Pumpkin PALOOZA through SNA, it is clear that the community shares a common ground; everybody is interested in Pumpkin PALOOZA. Reciprocity occurs because we are all working to support this philanthropy event., whether it be by working to support the philanthropy group, whether it be by planning the event, posting pictures in the group photo album, or simply joining the community.

CMC affects this group because it helps promote the event. There is definitely an online/offline synergy that takes place with the group; when everybody planning the event communicates online to exchange ideas and communicate face to face to discuss details and logistics, synergy takes place. This allows people to be more effective in planning the event and maintaining appropriate information on the group page. Rich channels of communication (face to face) are more effective for planning out more details of Pumpkin PALOOZA, while lean channels of communication (CMC) are perfect for promoting the event and tweeking details. CMC is so effective because of our work face to face.

If anybody is interested in Pumpkin PALOOZA, it should be a fun event. Feel free to join the group !

http://cornell.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6774459415

7.1| The "Art" of Friendship

Haythornwaite studies the existence of online communities and the effect such lean media has on the richness of a community. To delve further into these issues, he uses Social Network Analysis (SNA) to examine the social capital of a group, or more specifically, the common ground, social networking, and reciprocity that exists within it.

An online “community” of which I am a part is a facebook group called “Abc.”* “Abc” stands for Art Beyond Cornell, which is a service organization in which Cornell students go to an all girls penitentiary in Lansing and do art therapy with the girls there. Essentially, the main purpose of the group is accomplished face to face (FtF), however an online group facilitates our mission and allows us to better coordinate.

Within the group we are bonded through the common ground we share. This includes a common cause, common talents, and common experiences. Haythornwaite describes this as a “basis of community of practice: mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and shared repertoire” (129).

Our online presence allows for expanded social networking in that FtF, in that members of the group are often separated from others on the basis of what car they go in to drive to Lansing or which unit at Lansing they work with. This causes subdivisions within the group, as members tend to gravitate towards those with whom they have the greatest contact/common ground. This further demonstrates that Haythornwaite’s theory stands even in the microcosms of subgroups within Abc. However, online the group is not broken into these subdivisions, and is portrayed as a cohesive whole, allowing for new channels of communication between “weak ties,” as well as strong ones.

Furthermore, social networking occurs in the online group in that members feel a sense of belonging. This is seen in the fact that members are willing to share contact information. This feeling of closeness ignites friendships that otherwise may not have had the opportunity to emerge. While to cynics, online group membership can look like forced friendship, the sincere nature of some of the relationships is evident in the posting of individual information to the group that may be of interest to members, but is not in line with the main purpose of the group. Such information may include information about art exhibitions, social justice events, activities of other members (i.e. one member sings and plays guitar and invites members to hear her perform), and other activities branching out from the initial cause. Additionally, there is a tinge of pride at being in the online group due to its ambiguous nature. There is no description of the acronym or what the group is about (except the illusory quote: “We go to Lansing, we do art, we work with some amazing girls...”). The posted pictures also add to this mysterious aura in that they’re almost indistinguishable, often being abstract works by the girls at Lansing (see above)

With regard to reciprocity within the online community, the facebook group enables members to be individually responsible for the courtesy of informing the group of if and when they will not be able to attend. Also, the wall posts allow for suggestions for lesson plans, as well as group news. Since girls take turns coming up with lessons, this illustrates how a technologically mediated channel allows for reciprocity of members. Etzioni and Etzioni emphasized that such members “require measure of commitment and set of shared values, morals, meanings, and shared historical identity (129).”

Art Beyond Cornell uses other lean media, such as a listserv and email, to communicate. Since Art Beyond Cornell is primarily a FtF group, meetings outside of actually visiting Lansing allow members to brainstorm lesson plans, talk about what’s working and what isn’t, as well as the goals of the group. There is definitely a clear correspondence between the online-offline synergy of Art Beyond Cornell, where the lean media is a tool for the actual group to be more efficient and coordinated.

* http://cornell.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2200526900

Comments:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=7987382732157326011

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/72-hot-friends-can-only-make-you-look.html

7.1 Online Community

The social network I am analyzing is made up of my high school class members. The social network perspective differs from others in that it examines what is exchanged, communicated, and shared by pairs of individuals, rather than the aggregate behavior for a group, community, or location. Three important elements in Etzioni and Etzioni’s definition of community (which Haythornthwaite adopts) are social network, common ground, and reciprocity.

Patterns of strong and weak ties are what make up a social network. One has strong ties with those actors in the network whom they contact frequently. Strong ties within the network tend to be dense, and those with strong ties are often similar and have access to the same resources. Within this community, I have several strong ties. These are my closest friends from high school, whom I talk to through IM or email on a daily basis. I also have the most in common with my strong ties. As Haythornthwaite describes, my strong ties do tend to be dense, as many of them also have strong ties with one another.

In contrast, a person has a weak tie with someone whom they rarely contact. Although I know all members of my high school class, I no longer engage with every person on a daily or even yearly basis. Weak ties allow us to connect to a more unique and varied composition of resources. My weak ties tend to be majoring in different subjects, live in different parts of the country, know different people, etc. They have access to different resources that may come in extremely handy when I am looking for a job sometime in the future.

Another important element of a community is common ground, which refers to the level of commitment and shared values, mores, meanings, and shared historical identity. For members of this community, our common ground is our shared set of experiences, symbols, inside jokes, etc., which we accumulated throughout our high school experience and beyond. For example, we all have inside jokes about several of our high school teachers. Although these jokes have meaning to all those in the community, an outsider would probably find them meaningless

A third element of Haythornthwaite’s analysis is reciprocity, which involves an exchange of resources and information between members of the community. Within our social network, we constantly are giving and receiving support during difficult and joyous times. Furthermore, we share information about our schools, majors, and friends. The reciprocal information creates social capital, which refers to the fact that the network possesses value above the benefits accruing to individual pairs in the network.

Haythornthwaite also discusses online-offline synergies in her analysis. Because we are all scattered in different parts of the country, we have resorted to email and IM to keep in touch. In addition, after graduation, a fellow classmate created a Facebook group called “Holton-Arms Class of 2005,” for us to keep in touch with one another throughout college. This group gives us an opportunity to exchange inside jokes, memories, updates, etc. The group’s wall allows members of the class to keep in-touch with one another, especially those that they no longer see face to face. According to Etzioni and Etzioni, “those communities that combine both face to face and CMC systems would be able to bond better and share values more effectively than communities that rely upon only one or the other mode of communication.” Furthermore, Haythornthwaite writes that online communities extend rather than replace face-to-face communications. I find this to be particularly true in my situation. If not for the Internet, the communication within the network would fade, as we have very few opportunities to interact on a face-to-face basis. Instead, the Internet asks as a supplement through which we communicate when we are not within close physical proximity.

This experience conforms to the utopic, or Gemeinschaft, view of community. Our community has strong interpersonal ties, a shared focus, and a common language and identity. The addition of the Internet to our community has not torn us apart, but instead has allowed us to connect and engage with one another more often.

ttp://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/assignment-7-option-1-my-community.html

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/7-strong-bonds-support-soldiers.html

7.1 To get to the Top

When I graduated high school and prepared myself to come to Cornell where I would meet all new people and be in a completely different surrounding I spent a lot of time reminiscing on the fact that I would be leaving many people, places and experiences behind from high school. Engulfing in my first year at Cornell I really learned which friends I will remain close with. Not that it came as a surprise to me, but my best friends from my club rowing team are the girls that I can still rely on and know that we will always hold our bond. I think my rowing team can definitely exemplify Haythorhwaite’s ideas on community. Within our team there was an assortment of relationship spanning from having no bond between my Mercer club group with the Peddy School team that shared our boathouse. To the weak ties between some of the men and women on my team to the strong ties between the girls in my boat. The bond that we formed came from a close understand of each other and our mutual goals. Our team was one of high academic and athletic expectations and our goal was to win nationals. We trained 3 hours a day, 6 days a week, 3 seasons a year and spent every other waking moment together at the library or complaining about all of our mutual pains and stresses, despite most of us going to different schools. Looking at our SNA properties that make us a community I think our strongest bond was our common ground. When we would tell our school friends about rowing or talk about common injuries no one would really understand us. Most of my teachers knew little to nothing about the sport and people didn’t understand my team’s level of commitment to our goal. Often my school friends would be upset with me for missing weekend events with them because I gave up so much time to hang out for the team. This level of sacrifice was a source of common ground among the girls in my boat that we shared together. The idea of reciprocity on our team was also a huge factor in our accomplishment of eventually winning the national championship. The amount communication that needs to go on between the rowers, coaches and coxswains is huge. The idea of peer and coach feedback is what makes any rower better. Every day our coach would talk to us about everything from technique to goals to our everyday choices and then in the boat we’d get constant coaching from our coxswains and then on the land after practice was the time for the rowers to talk among each other and with the coaches to ask questions and relay our feelings about how the team was going. This team was definitely my strongest community in high school and from those four year, my friends, bonds, and lessons learned are the most memorable and life changing to me.

7.1 - women's soccer

Here at Cornell, students have developed some sort of personal identity. Whether it is being on an athletic team, a member of a sorority/fraternity or even just being a part of a specific major. Haythornwaite defines a community as “a web of affect-laden relationships that encompasses a group of individuals”. We have developed communities in our lives and continue to contribute to their advances and successes. I am currently a part of the Cornell Women’s Soccer community. According to Haythornwaite, Gemeinschaft states that a community is based on certain aspects including strong interpersonal ties, shared focus and common language/identity. We go through painful fitness practices, stay up late studying, and sacrifice social opportunities all for the same goal. We spend a large portion of almost every day together and develop very strong interpersonal ties. Your relationships with your teammates can never be compared to relationships with others. We all have the same focus and same common purpose while we are on the field and off. While we are on the field, we listen and respect our coaches and the systems and technique they may be teaching us. Off the field, we are all focused on schoolwork and balancing both academics and athletics. We share the same identity – Cornell University women’s soccer players and student-athletes.

CMC does play a role on our team. Often our coaches or captains will send out emails for quick, informative notes, or to make scheduling plans. For example, today before practice our coach sent out an email to the entire team saying “make sure everyone has their running shoes today before practice”. Normally, we only have our cleats but because of a tough loss this weekend our team was going to do some running on pavement before our practice. Often, our captains will send out emails starting a thread on team bonding ideas. Many people will respond with their ideas until we come up with the best ideas (for example last weekend was pumpkin carving). In the summer, CMC is what keeps our team together and allows us to begin interacting with the incoming freshmen.

Communities require a lot of time and commitment. In order for the community to develop and progress every member must share the same values morals and goals. The relationships in the community must continue to criss cross and reinforce each other. The women’s soccer team is comprised of a great group of girls who work every day to contribute to the success of the team and the rewards that come with being a part of such a close-knit community.

7.2: AIM profile analysis

I chose to analyze my friend Fran’s personality based on the profile which exists in the online space of instant messaging. The AIM profile is a small area to which the user can add text, links and other things so buddies can see them.

Fran’s profile revealed several environmental links as described by the Brunswikian lens model. The first one that I noticed was “Interior Behavioral Residue”. This is evidence in her profile of something that existed in the online space, namely instant messaging, that shows me something about her personality. In this case, Fran had copied and pasted snippets of other conversations she’d had into her profile. For the most part, they were just funny misinterpretations or quotes that she or a friend had said. After reading a few of them, I felt that she was very agreeable and extroverted, based on the positive, light-hearted nature of the quotes. I believe that she put these quotes in her profile to show these characteristics to other people, so that would make them “Other Directed Identity Claims”. These are items placed in her profile specifically with the purpose of making others aware of some trait or characteristic about herself. One of the quotes, however, also demonstrated a “Self Directed Identity Claim”. This is anything that Fran would put in her profile that is not meant to convey something specific to others, but to serve as a reminder to herself, or possibly be an inside joke with a friend. I didn’t understand the context of this conversation, but I could tell it was some kind of inside joke. It is both a self and other directed claim because it is put in there as a private joke between friends, but it also helped teach me about her personality, even though I didn’t know the exact meaning of the exchange.

The rest of her profile is peppered with “Exterior Behavioral Residue”. This is evidence of her life outside of AIM which teach me about her personality. For instance, she listed her Cornell hockey seat number. This is a clear indication of her life outside of AIM and also an “Other Directed Claim”. I can learn or infer that she likes her school as well as sports. Another example is a little tribute she has to what I know to be her best friends from her freshman dorm. There is a short, sentimental quote as well as a list of the dorm-mates’ initials with a heart on the end. This shows another aspect of her life outside of AIM. It is also a “Self Directed Identity Claim” because I don’t know what that quote refers to, even though it is probably very meaningful to those few people. This part of her profile showed me about her openness, especially her appreciation for emotion. The quote seemed to be very poignant, and I’m sure it’s much more meaningful to those people it involved.

Comment 1
Comment 2

7.1 The Internet Makes You Stupid

Haythornwaite used the Social Network Analysis method to examine the various characteristics of an online community. The exchange, communication and sharing between members of the online community can demonstrate the overall behavior and properties of the group. The three main attributes of SNA are: social networking, common grounds, and reciprocity.

The specific community I (reluctantly) decided to examine is one that has often been derided by various media. The community is an online forum called “Something Awful*.” (Or simply SA) The forum ( http://forums.somethingawful.com ) is divided into multiple sub-forums catering to different interests, such as Games, Debate & Discussion and ADTRW (what does it stand for? You really do not want to know). While anyone can view most of the main forums, one must pay a one-time $10 fee to make any posts and gain permanent, unrestricted access.

The social networking aspect of SA is glaring apparently. Each user has a profile, some even with a profile photo and detailed descriptions of their interests and contact information, à la Facebook. SA members (commonly referred to as “goons”) discuss (a very…tame word for what they actually do) a wide variety of topics, ranging from current events to music to sports. With an additional $10 payment, users gain access to premium features such as private messaging between individual members. With over 100,000 members total and at least 4,000-5,000 members logged on at any given time, the amount of interaction and virtual networking is enormous. Many events, both online and offline are organized through the forums system. Relationships, even romantic ones, are not unheard of in this vast group of eclectic individuals.

Common grounds are easy to identify as well in the SA community. Certain values are shared by the vast majority of the users, although most are stereotyped to be negative ones (e.g. selfishness, disrespect for societal rules, crude sense of humor, and distain for non-members). The title of the main page of Something Awful includes the curiously cynical comment “The Internet Makes You Stupid,” which only goes to further demonstrate the eccentricities of goons. Shared “meanings” are very common as well, with “secret” question/answers (the famous stairs question) and “handshake” catch-phrases (“beep beep I’m a truck”) used to identify other SA users. They are often inane and nonsensical, but these silly customs help to forge incredibly strong bonds.

Reciprocity is natural on the SA forums. The moderators are rarely forgiving and the SA users themselves jump at the opportunity to ridicule, make fun of, belittle, shame, and humiliate those who post anything remotely deserving of criticism. However, the overt amount of insults and arguments are often the source of much humor and entertainment. Ironically, this heavy persecution of non-conformers interestingly leads to many dissenters who simply wanted to incite frustration and distaste from others, for purpose of gaining attention or comedy. In a way, all the name-calling and derisive comments serve as a form of reinforcement for types of behavior that are expected of Something Awful.

The most amazing part about the SA community, and the chief reason I chose it for this assignment, is the extreme online/offline synergy. The generosity and trust between SA members amount to more than even many conventional “real life” communities. An SA member traveling across the country may receive free lodging and help along the way by other members, and a goon in need can find surprising amount of resources and aid from the forums (e.g. technical support, legal troubles, amateur medical diagnosis). The synergy is not always positive, however, as one primary example of disturbing online/offline interaction is quite prevalent in SA – the act of “internet policing.” When one member makes a claim or posts an event that is incredulous or just interesting, others rush to exploit a variety of online and offline resources to find the real life information of those involved. This can lead to serious breach of privacy and embarrassment to those scrutinized, and that is also why I did not go into some of the more “interesting” analytical aspects of this unique community, lest that I become a target of thousands of other SA members (yes, I am one myself, much to my own chagrin I suppose) looking for someone to mock and scoff.

*Something Awful is well known as a big perpetrator of internet memes and trends. Its members range anywhere from celebrities, doctors, college students, professors, to stalkers, ladies of morally questionable occupation, and even murderers (only 2 verifiably identified so far). Wikipedia provides a brief overview on the incredible nature of Something Awful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something_Awful

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/7-gaming-community.html#c8460299019665659260

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/72-personality-assessment-joe.html#c9203028493028322089

7.1: I Survived the Monroe-Woodbury Food Fight of '04

The last day of my sophomore year of high school stands out as one of if not the most epic day of my educational career. On this special day at Monroe-Woodbury HS, freshmen and seniors alike had conspired to carry out the seemingly impossible task of engaging in full-out food fight warfare during a particular lunch period. After the initial food was thrown, and several minutes of subsequent, juvenile bliss, the food fight came to an end and school administrators were left with thousands of dollars worth of damage to our cafeteria as well as hundreds of riled up teenagers to deal with. Instead of the logical move of keeping all those involved within the confines of the cafeteria, faculty members at my school instructed us to leave the cafeteria, forcing us triumphant students to hold a impromptu pep rally in the hall in celebration of our distaste of high school. As state police troops were ultimately called in for reinforcement, our food fight turned riot amounted to front page headlines on our local newspaper as well as international (yes international) press coverage. Success!




Coincidentally, one of my best friends and I had decided to bring in our video cameras to document our last day of school. We were both lucky enough to capture a great deal of the experience on film and felt a serious obligation to our peers to create a video (and a great obligation to ourselves to create profit). Needless to say, the "Foodfight DVDs," as they were commonly referred to, sold like hot cakes and within a month of the food fight hundreds had been distributed.

Throughout my last two years in high school, I heard stories of Monroe-Woodbury alum sharing their food fight videos with their new college friends-- the food fight had become the quintessential Monroe-Woodbury story, and the food fight DVD was the most accessible means through which to tell it. By the time I finally entered college, most of my peers had either scratched or lost their DVDs and I decided it was time to truly immortalize the M-W Food Fight and embrace the world of YouTube. Within the past 7 months the video has been viewed over 18,000 times.

So why the lengthy story about high school anarchy? Well, because last year while I was a bit reluctant to upload the food fight video to YouTube and end the possibility of ever having MTV's High School Stories pay me for it, I was invited to a very special Facebook group: I Survived the Monroe-Woodbury Food Fight of '04.

As one might expect, the members of this specific online community are those who, you guessed it, survived the food fight I previously described. As a community, it can be described using SNA (social network analysis) by evaluating the ways in which the group displays the various aspects of social capital: social networking, common group, and reciprocity.

Social network can be described as the web, relationships, bonding, and commitment displayed through a community. Within the "I Survived..." Facebook group, social networking is allowed through wall posts in which members describe their specific stories of the fateful day in high school. Similarly, members are also allowed to reminisce by uploading their very own food fight pictures. Of course, Facebook allows members to communicate outside of the group, as members are able to use the group as a tool through which to re-connect with old high school friends.


Common ground, which involves a shared historical identity, is especially easy to determine within the "I Survived..." Facebook group. Since all of the group's members attended my high school at the same time, there are several inherent similarities between members such as geographic location and high school. Additionally, members also share their memory of the food fight, the basis on which the group was formed.

Reciprocity, the means by which members reinforce and respond to one another, is also very much present within the "I Survived..." group. Throughout the various wall postings, are a number of arguments and debates; while many people joined the group to celebrate the food fight, others joined to condemn it. Additionally, before I had uploaded the food fight video to YouTube, the group seemed to be almost entirely geared towards locating the video on the Internet, as members promoted one another to find and upload their copies of the DVD.

This specific online community exists almost exclusively on the Internet. Since all members went to high school together, we all inherently share much more than our membership to a specific Facebook group. However, for future generations of food fight hopefuls, I can certainly imagine a few ways in which the synergy between online and offline could become very useful.


Comments! Woo!
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-internet-makes-you-stupid.html
&
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-art-of-friendship.html

7.1 | The Secret Life of Mac Users

Long before I purchased my first Macintosh computer, I’ve noticed an unusually strong connection between Mac Users. My high school friends would often break into conversation about the next Macs, allowing social outsiders to temporarily break into the conversation and offer their two cents. Strangers in Apple stores easily start conversation with one another, providing personal advice or anecdotes about the latest operating system. The half-eaten apple has grown from a simple logo to a secret handshake amongst Mac Users and their underground bond.

Mac Users share a common ground interest in high-quality computers and not conforming to the Windows standard. Some Apple users are united in professional identity through film, music, or grapchic production, which widely rely on Macintosh computers. My friends and myself enjoy the simple interface, reliability, and elegant look and feel. Mac developers most likely share a commitment to the technical advantages behind Macs over Windows. Different social circles connect over a wide variety of common ground stemming from a superior product.

A few of my close friends own Macs and most of our conversation revolves around Mac news and fixing each others problems. These two types of transactions correspond are 'goods,' as Haythornwaite describes. Knowing when Apple will release their next laptops can save me from buying at the wrong time. Mac computer help (although rarely required) can be very valuable, especially for new Mac users needing help setting up their computers. Both interactions are usually reciprocal, as Mac Users are willing to help others when needed in exchange for help in the future. When someone hears a new Mac rumor, he or she is often obliged to tell all of his or her Mac friends, expecting the same in return. These interactions even have their own language as per the Gemeinschaft definition of community: ‘the dock,’ ‘Safari,’ and ‘drag-n-drop’ are a few fundamentals only Mac Users are familiar with. Additionally, Mac users exclusively participate in online events such as four-way video chat. Enthusiasts I know travel to Apple store openings with one another as well as to developer conferences and Mac User Groups. Mac Users develop close relations with their surrounding network and often maintain closer ties with Mac friends than with Windows people. Because this common interest strengthens already present social network ties, it forms its own sub-social network within the aggregate, linking friends with Macs all over the world.

The mutual exchange of rumors and technical help has boomed online, and only widened the network by expanding the social capital given to Mac Users. Even if one doesn’t have any friends with a Mac, he or she can reap the benefits from online forums. This thread is one example of the community’s willingness to spread and share rumors to help with purchase timing. The also users self-disclose and address one another, just as an offline community would. Although these people are strangers offline, the Mac community makes them close friends online:

“I agree with Acting rude... if you wait every time something new is announced you'll never get it.”

“I like the idea of black aluminum... I won't be super anxious about what's coming for much longer...”

The degree to which Mac Users are able to freely interact with one another online yields another great benefit of social capital: mobilization. When Apple dropped the price on the iPhone, its customers quickly confided in one another on this thread. Petitions were signed and Mac Users all over the web complained in masses. This resulted in Apple listening to its community and giving early purchasers a rebate to quell the fire. Such mobilization could never occur without the online spaces for quick communication, nor the strength of the Mac Community. The social capital that Mac Users receive from one another develops more strongly online, where access to fellow users is easier and less expensive to maintain. Capital also develops offline, where we can talk to our friends about technical problems and rumors face to face. However, swift mobilization and archives of user-generated help and rumor reports would never exist without the Internet. Online spaces have greatly increased the visibility and influence of fellow Mac Users, making it easy to find each other and hence the community.

I also keep in touch with my Mac friends through IM when I need their valuable expertise. I often ask my high school friends Mac questions online, maintaining our offline Mac User community through this lean medium. The online/offline synergies exist in many ways, explaining some of the ways the Mac Community maintains its strong, albeit invisible presence.

Comment 1
Comment 2

7.2 Personality Assessment

I decided to analyze my high school friend’s Facebook page to assess his personality (we shall call him “Sam”). Through environmental cues, I have formed an impression about him, which can be described through several factors in the Brunswikian Lens Model. For my impression to be accurate, both cue validity and cue utilization are necessary; this results in “functional achievement,” or a more accurate impression. A valid cue means it correctly tells you something about a person, while cue utilization questions if the cue is actually used during the impression formation process.

I primarily used the four mechanisms linking individuals to their environment. Other-directed identity claims attempt to convey a specific image of oneself to others in an online space. The self-posted Profile data and photo albums on Facebook has reinforced my view of “Sam” as very involved in activities in his college, extroverted, and as a “rock star.” His pictures available to all his friends on Facebook have shown him and his band performing in several venues over the past year. His self-written “profile” information highlights his love of music through listing his favorite music as many modern rock bands, his sole interest as Music, and quotations from musicians. Self-directed identity cues are mostly directed towards the self and may have very little revealing identity information. My friend has done a lot of traveling with friends and family, and the photos he has uploaded for all to view on Facebook serve both as a reminder to himself of where he has been (self-directed) and what kind of person he wants to portray himself as (other-directed).

External behavioral residue is cues that are leftover results of activity outside an online communication medium (such as Facebook). The comments “Sam” has posted on his friends’ walls and the comments they have posted on his wall serve as the largest source of external behavior residue because they confirm his personality traits and what he has done recently. It has provided a record of “Sam” at this point in his life. Many of his band members have posted complimentary comments about his excellent vocals at their previous performance, and his class mates say they look forward to listening to him perform. This confirms his “rock star” image. Internal behavioral residue is cues that are leftover results of activity from within Facebook (or any online communication medium). For example, when “Sam” added an artist to his list of Favorite musicians, the “News Feed” on Facebook broadcast this update to his profile.

The Five Factor Model (Hancock and Dunham, 2001) states that Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness are five important factors involved in assessing one’s personality online. I agree with Hancock and Dunham’s assertion that Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Agreeableness are much less noticeable in CMC, and especially on “Sam’s” profile. I would argue that “Sam” is highly extroverted and open about his own life and involvement in his band, but he is less agreeable (in terms of the somewhat extreme political views and statements he has listed in his profile) and not at all neurotic. As in person, my Facebook communication has confirmed that he is both agreeable and conscientious in everything he does. I would also argue that his CMC cues are quite valid and accurate, and functional achievement is highly likely.

Comments:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=1447789653441054858

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5400576841210402935&postID=2300652280304839693