Sunday, December 13, 2009

MySpace and Facebook: Friendship, New Identities and Love is Just a Click Away



“At this very moment, on Facebook alone ,over 200 million people around the world are logged in, updating their status, interacting with friends, interacting with brands, providing valuable information for you to be able to understand them better, and learning about you in return” (Shih, 4). This site along with MySpace, Twitter, and blogs allow for people to connect with others all throughout the world with the click of a mouse. Today the internet gives us endless possibilities, and practically anyone can create an account on these sites. Whether this is considered to be a good thing or a bad thing is debatable. People in the 20th century are now becoming completely dependent on technology, the internet; emailing, texting and sites like MySpace/Facebook as a means for communication, creating new identities, as well as opening the doors for online dating, relationships and a means for finding love.



The MySpace and Facebook community have become just as diverse as its users. Some people resort to these sites for dating, friend network, reconnecting with old friends, music, or just a means of talking to people you wouldn’t typically talk to. These sites do have their differences; MySpace is aimed toward more high school aged audiences and Facebook is more college and business oriented. In reality people of all ages are using both sites; the founder of MySpace Tom Anderson says “70 percent of MySpace users are over the age of 18” (Gordon, 2009). It might be the basic idea of being able to personalize your profile and being able to see and write to people you know or strangers you just met, which draws users of all ages. Facebook is marketed to look more professional. Everyone has the same profile the only thing that varies is the information found on each profile; it almost resembles a resume. You look at a Myspace profile and the idea is to be able to get a sense of what that person is about; it is like you are the subject of art piece on your profile, on display for others to view.




“The internet is imagined as a space in which we are able to communicate freely with one another across the divisions of class, race, nationality, gender, language and geography. Heaven indeed” (Barker, 348). MySpace and Facebook both allow for users to go beyond these barriers and create their own identity. Profiles allow users to create an image they feel more comfortable with, which may be completely different from the image they choose to portray on a daily basis. “Cyberspace is a domination of playful identity construction where anything is possible” (Barker, 349). Anyone can go online and choose what information they want to reveal about themselves and decide who they want to view that information.




Sites such as MySpace and Facebook give users the freedom to change their age, gender, race basically their entire identity and appearance. “Online interaction spaces are places where individuals can take on multiple identities in ways never before possible and indeed bring about changes in conventional notions of identity itself” (Peterson and Wilson, 457). For example, someone can make an account saying they are a 17 year old boy when in reality it is a 50 year old man trying to pick up on teenage girls online. It’s a scary thought not really knowing if the picture on someone’s profile is truly the face of the person you are talking to or just a random picture of a different person.



Another form of identity reconstruction takes place through video games, Farmville (Facebook game), Mafia Wars (MySpace), etc. “It is argued that by enabling players to mask their worldly identities, virtual space allows a range of identity performances that are not tied to material bodies” (Barker, 360). Many video games allow people to create their characters by choosing their gender, and appearance among other things; breaking the boundaries of gender, race and class. We are constantly reminded by the media what the ideal man or women should look like and that we can have the perfect body with the right diet or proper surgery. “Popular culture does not apply any brakes to these fantasies of rearrangement and transformation. Rather, we are constantly told that we can “choose” our own bodies” (Bordo, 1110). The game world is like a new and cheaper form of plastic surgery; being able to create a new perception of self by choosing what your character will look like; from gender to eye color. Both Facebook and MySpace offer users the opportunity to be a part of a virtual world; one that users can be consumed by or become lost in. The game world tends to blur the boundaries between “reality” and the fantasy of the game world; it offers people their own alternate world.




MySpace, Facebook, chat rooms, and even text messages all allow internet users to rely on technology to communicate with people rather than having face-to-face conversations. It is understandable that some things are more easily expressed over a MySpace/Facebook messages, emails, chatting online, or a text message. In Chris Barker’s Cultural Studies, he suggests “the digital cellphone is ubiquitous in contemporary culture and is fast becoming the communications focal point of our lives” (Barker, 369). Now it seems that instead of receiving a call for our birthdays or other occasions we are receiving emails, texts, or posts on our MySpace/Facebook profiles. These have even become an easier way to end relationships; instead of having the dreadful and awkward breakup conversation you could just send a text message and avoid the confrontation. People often feel more relaxed through online or text conversations; communicating with others online gives people the confidence to say whatever is on their mind and to say things they might not say in person. However, this may harm social skills; online people grow used to having time to think about their response, creating less spontaneity. It seems like the internet is giving people many alternatives, pretty soon we will only be communicating through emails and texts.





“The internet is a revolution; therefore, it is likely to be a linguistic revolution” (Peterson and Wilson, 459). The internet is contributing to the common use of abbreviations instead of the usage of proper sentences and grammar. The format of Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter limits user’s status to a paragraph at the most in length. The internet encourages the use of abbreviations such as “cuz,” “kool,” “wat,” “dunno,” etc. Only selective groups can understand the internet language; the older generation for example would probably have no clue what some of the abbreviations and acronyms used online mean. “Some critics have gone further and imagined the internet as a transcendent democratic medium with a universal language” (Barker, 348). It is as if the internet now has its own dialect. The online community is continually adding to the internet dialect; having the power to create their own abbreviations, their own language. This is definitely a form of radicalism in itself.




With technology increased speed is a trend, but perhaps when it come to status updates on MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter the faster things are the less thought that is put into them; causing depersonalization and less analysis involved in users status updates, posts, messages, etc. Online laughter is signified through the acronym “lol” or “haha.” No real emotion can be expressed online because no one interprets things the same way. “Words carry multiple meanings, including the echoes or traces of other meanings from other related words in other contexts. Language is non-representational and meaning is inherently unstable so that it constantly slides away” (Barker, 85). It is hard to know when someone is being sarcastic or serious online because you cannot see their facial expressions or body language. Without being face-to-face with someone what is said during an online conversation is open to interpretation by the person reading it.





The internet allows people to express their opinions through MySpace, Facebook, Twitter and blogging. For many people sharing their thoughts online is an outlet; others just use it as another way to gossip. Some use these sites to rant away about feelings that they are less likely to act on in person. “Blogs moved from being just easy places to self-publish to an emerging community of discussion…Blogs allow anyone to put their point of view and through them we may learn about events from an angle previously denied us” (Barker, 352-53). Blogs allow people to communicate with those who have common interest and support their ideas; it can also be therapeutic for others, even a new way to morn about a lost. Anyone can create a blog and voice their thoughts about pretty much anything they feel is important. “Through the Internet, local issues can become part of the network of global connections while still remaining specific to local concerns” (Barker, 353). People can post their opinions on for example, Obama’s Health Care plan, and because their opinion is out on the web they feel they made a difference. This creates an illusion of activism and may prevent actual activist movements because people get the sense that there is no need to share your opinion in public if it was already done online.




Not only are there sites that help people keep in touch with friends, such as MySpace and Facebook or sites that let people know what you are doing ever second of our life like Twitter; there are also sites in which people can inform everyone about bad things that happen to them in life. On sites such as FMyLife their slogan is “get the guts and spill the beans.” It is almost like a version of Twitter but people can only post about all their bad experiences; and other users of this site can actually vote on where they think the person deserved what happened to them or if they agree their life sucks. It seems people feel more comfortable putting their personal business on these sites because no one will know who they are and at the same time they are allowed to vent and receive compassion or feedback from other user’s who vote on their post. One user posted, “
Today, I posted a picture of my boyfriend and I kissing on facebook. He untagged himself. FML” (Valette, 2009). Sites such as FMyLife may also cause people to compete with each other to see who is the most intense and extreme. Is this a good site to go on and vent your troubles, or a site to go on to make yourself feel better about your own life? Chances are it is probably a mixture of both for most people who use sites such as FMyLife.




MySpace and Facebook allow people to share photos, videos, instant messages, comments, bulletin posts with their friends, and become fans of their favorite celebrities. Users are constantly uploading the best pictures of themselves to make the best impressions; using photo shop or photo bucket to add effects to their pictures and really make themselves noticed. Just by having attractive friends on your page that also makes you look more attractive to those viewing your page. Users try to fit into certain categories yet still try to make their profiles different so they stand out from the rest. Everyone at one point or another feels the need to be accepted. Since social network sites involve participation and collaboration does that mean that other people are participating in the construction of our identities on social network sites? Wall comments on Facebook or profile comments on MySpace; positive comments increase a user’s social attractiveness. Users always find themselves deleting comments from their page if they do not like what they say because they do not want everyone to be reading about an embarrassing moment of theirs or something that might change people’s perception of them. Both sites also allow people to accept or deny friend requests; giving people power and control over who they want to interact with online. Having your “friend request” denied or not making someone’s “top friends” list can also affect people’s self-esteem but when the person you like puts you on their “top friends” it seems like the most exciting thing in the world; and you are constantly online checking to see if you move up or down in numbers on the “top friends.” Going from being someone’s fourth friend on their “top friends” to being the tenth or twelfth can be crucial and then you have to go to your profile and move them down on your “top friends” as well; or if someone has you on their top you feel the need to place them on yours. Then if you are removed from someone’s top you quickly go to your page and replace them as well; it can turn into a competition of who can be ranked higher on the “top friends.” Now we can rank people from one to four, one to twenty-four or not at all; they can just be one of the hundred friends on your friend list that you never even talk to.




Privacy measures give users more control over who views their profiles because let’s face it there are some people who we do not want to be viewing our profiles and pictures (parents, ex boyfriends/girlfriends, etc.). People also have the power to block other users from finding them on these sites, or from viewing certain information on their profiles. I am sure everyone gets curious and wanders from one persons profile to another’s and so on; it is an endless cycle which can consume you. Whether you know the person whose profile you’re viewing or not; it is just pure curiosity. Why is everyone driven by curiosity? Is it because we want to see how others live their life? Are we looking for someone else’s life to compare to our own? Is it a way to get ideas on how to improve our own profile or our identity? Or is it a mixture of boredom and our curiosity that drives us to look onto pages of strangers? No matter what the reason is behind our curiosity it is still a creepy thought to know that ex boyfriends/girlfriends, people you used to talk to, or people you don’t even know are viewing your information.




MySpace and Facebook have fostered the idea that relationships can be formed and ended quickly and easily. These sites have been known for causing jealousy and possibly ruining relationships. Users in relationships may perceive a hint of infidelity and go on a hunt for evidence on MySpace or Facebook to support their partner’s unfaithful thoughts or behavior. If someone posts a comment on a picture and your partner does not like what they had to say that alone can spark up an argument. It seems a bit ridiculous that a mere comment or message can determine whether a relationship will come to an end.



MySpace and Facebook relationship status not only put one person in the social networking mirror but two, which can make things as the Facebook phrase says “complicated.” Facebook gives users six relationship categories “single”, “in a relationship”, “engaged”, “married”, “it’s complicated”, and “in an open relationship.” “Users can decline to list a status, but Facebook estimates that roughly 60% of its users do, with "single" and "married" the most common statuses” (Suddath, 2009). Some users feel that you only change your status when a relationship is official and you don’t change your status until after you have the “we need to talk” talk. Then the unwritten rule states that you both race to a computer or your phones to be the first who changes their status to “single.”









Why do people feel the only way to validate or make their relationship status exclusive and official is to make it known to the Facebook or MySpace public? Some people think that if it is not on Facebook or MySpace it is not official. When a significant other doesn't want to list his or her involvement in the relationship it causes a disturbance in the real-world relationship; the accidental change that alerts friends to a nonexistent breakup (causing endless annoyance and arguments); but worse than both is when the truth spreads uncontrollably (Suddath, 2009). In many cases it is through MySpace and Facebook that we become aware of new relationships, breakups, and engagements; these sites provide users with their daily dose of news regarding the lives of others.




Relationships in general are hard work and now people are substituting making connections with people face-to-face for finding love online. MySpace and Facebook are being used by millions to meet people to “hook-up” with or to form relationships. Even movies such as “You’ve Got Mail” tell the story of two people who discovered love while using the internet. When it comes to relationships we like those that reward us, or that we associate with rewards. Whether meeting and interacting face-to-face or in cyberspace, it can be assumed that individuals are seeking positive rewards, but this is probably where the commonalities between the two end (Merkle and Richardson, 188).




“Global presence of the Internet diminishes the need for spatial proximity; the textual and graphical based interface of Internet applications reduces the salience of physical attractiveness; Internet communication allows for anonymity; and candid self-disclosure becomes significant as the only means for two users to know one another” (Merkle and Richardson, 188). In face-to-face romantic relationships two individuals have a physical attraction, and spatially interact with one another. With Internet relationships users typically find themselves geographically separated further guaranteeing never really being able to know one another. Complete strangers that give each other the illusion of closeness and being connected yet at the same time detached. For some users having someone to talk to on a daily basis and knowing they will probably never meet their internet partner face-to-face is a comforting thought; less pressure.




“Make love happen,” is the slogan for the popular site match.com, where the love of your life is believed to be just a click away. It is believed that after users answer some questions about themselves and create a profile, within second’s they can be matched up with the love of their life; for only the price of $30 a month you could find love. So now people are relying on the internet to match them up with someone and to find love; no longer do people go out and find love at first sight. But now people are using MySpace, Facebook and chat rooms to find love as well; it is like a free version of sites like match.com. Some people take Internet relationships serious and to others it is just a game. It is easier to talk to the opposite sex online, say things, or ask questions that you would not normally say if you had the person in front of you. So it is possible that it is easier for people to get to know each other faster online but that does not meant that the information people give about themselves is completely true. Can the freedom to share limitless information about yourself with your online partner substitute non-face-to-face interaction and physical connection? In some cases Internet relationships may result in marriage and for others in sheer disaster. “Cultural approval of familial love gained ground reasonably steadily in Western civilization from the 17th century onward…By the 18th century, the cultural standards favorable to love were being more widely internalized…Victorian agreement on the importance of love for men, and on its spiritual qualities, did not survive the first half of the 20th century…cultural norms being directed at men, significant in itself, and related to other revisions in male/female relationships such as dating practices” (Knapp and Stearns, 770-775). It seems that love continues to be redefined as time goes on, now in the 20th century we have added love to the list of things we look for on the internet.









“Cyberspace is a spatial metaphor for the ‘nowhere’ place in the electronic activities of computers, cable systems and other digital communications technologies occur…Of course, this may mean new modes of communication, interaction and identity construction in a novel form of social space” (Barker, 348). So here is how both MySpace and Facebook work: you set up a profile page with details about yourself and then decide who gets to see it. Users can use their pages to share personal news, exchange photos, team up on political causes, or just play games online with people from all around the world.




The internet is a world where everything moves fast and changes all the time, where relationships can be quickly be disposed of with the click of the mouse, where you can delete your profile if you don't like it, or have more than one; users can trade an unacceptable identity in the blink of an eye for one that is more acceptable. Online communities provide users with social networks, business transactions, future marital partners, and even sexual desires can be fulfilled. MySpace and Facebook are two of the sites contributing to the development of internet dialect and giving people the power to connect and share with the world. Helping people reconnect with friends, making families feel closer, or even serving as a tool to find relationships, “hook-ups” or “booty-calls.” One can present themselves in any way they would like; construct a first impression in a way that is not possible to do in person. However, are these sites leading to depersonalization and anti-social skills in face-to-face interactions? Instead of picking up the phone to call someone don’t we use texting, e-mail and social-networking sites to rely our message? At the end of the day these sites can be a useful tool or an addictive waste of time.












Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE.


Bordo, Susan. "Material Girl: The Effacements of Postmodern Culture." 1110.
Gordon, Jillian. "MySpace Founder Tom Anderson." Web. 20 Nov. 2009.
http://www.snmag.com/INTERVIEWS/Celebrity-Interviews/MySpace-Founder-Tom-Anderson.html.

Greenfield, Patricia, and Kaveri Subrahmanyam. "Online Communication and Adolescent Relationships." The Future of Children 18.1 (2008): 119-46.

Knapp, Mark, and Peter N. Stearns. "Men and Romantic Love: Pinpointing a 20th-Century Change." Journal of Social History Vol. 26.4 (1993): 769-95.

Merkle, Erich R., and Rhonda A. Richardson. "Digital Dating and Virtual Relating: Conceptualizing Computer Mediated Romantic Relationships." Family Relations 49.2 (2000): 187-92.

Peterson, Leighton C., and Samuel M. Wilson. "The Anthropology of Online Communities." Annual Review of Anthropology 31 (2002): 449-67.

Shih, Clara. The Facebook Era. United States: Pearson Education Inc, 2009.

Suddath, Claire. "Your Facebook Relationship Status: It's Complicated." TIME 8 May 2009.

Valette, Maxime. "The love category’s anecdotes." Web. 30 Nov. 2009. .

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Myspace/Facebook Group


For our Myspace/Facebook presentation we focused on the internet audiences, internet vernacular, activism, opinions, voyeurism, unreality, the difference between myspace/facebook, and the effect both sites have on socializing. We also focused on incorporating chapters from Barker. Each group member was responsible for going through the Barker chapters and finding ideas that related to myspace/facebook.

My part in the presentation required me to discuss the effects myspace/facebook have on socialization. How these sites cause people to rely more on communicating with people through chatting online, emails, and even text messages as opposed to having face-to-face conversations. I also provided an outline with quotes from Butler’s theories on identity, and the internet; Butler refers to the internet as a space in which people can communicate freely across divisions of class and race. I found this to be relevant to the myspace/facebook sites because these sites allow people to keep in contact with people from other parts of the world. Along with my outline I developed discussion questions which related to identity and that would get the class thinking about how people can change their identity on the internet. I was also in charge of making the sugar cookies that were passed out to those who participated in the discussion. The cookies were decorated with two different blue frostings; one represented facebook and the others represented myspace. The facebook cookie had things such as “poke”, “tag”, “Farmville”, etc. written on them to represent things that are found on facebook. The myspace cookies had things such as “photo comment”, “new message”, “tag”, etc. on them to represent different things that are found on myspace.