In class on Monday we debated the validity and authenticity of communities formed or maintained online. Many people in class agreed that communities formed online produce \u201cdrive-by\u201d relationships that do not foster trust or commitment from members. However, technology can aid in maintaining pre-existing communities. For example, Facebook may help maintain ties that are formed in real life if members of the community become physically distanced. As an example, we discussed how the Parkour community is grounded in corporeal reality, but information is disseminated through an online community, and this community can manifest in physical spaces anywhere in the world because it is not tied to a specific place. This reminds me of Webber, who proposed that accessibility to a group of interest is more important than physical nearness to community members. An increase in transport and availability of information relating to a distant community aids in the ability of people to join these communities of interest. Following from this logic, it seems that online communities are just another form of technology that helps to connect people to whatever group they are interested in. If this is the case, can we really conclude that relationships formed online are not authentic or constitute strong ties? Is there something vital about sharing a physical space that makes a connection more genuine?<\/p>\n
To that end, we discussed how technology has changed the way we embody physical space (eg. one might be physically present, but not actually interacting with those around them because they are absorbed in their technology). Is it possible that in the future relationships online will become more important than having some sort of shared physical space? If so, I am wondering what the consequences of that would be, and what the problem with having important online relationships is, if they provide equal sociability and support to what would be gained through face-to-face interactions.<\/p>\n
In Driskell & Lyon\u2019s study, they argued that since it is \u201ceasier to replace the relationship, change chat rooms, or \u2018move\u2019 to another virtual community\u201d (382) online than it is to alter your face-to-face interactions with people, online relationships have limited liability and therefore do not constitute community. Do people find this argument convincing? I can understand it to some extent, but I think technology has also aided people in the ability to identify new physical spaces they could interact with, allowing them more flexibility and mobility in corporeal communities. What\u2019s more, I\u2019m not sure how much liability one feels to their neighbors or co-workers, for example, simply because they embody a shared space.<\/p>\n
We also discussed the level of homogeneity that might be necessary for the formation of a community. It seems intuitive that people look for others like themselves to spend time with, and that tension within a group is reduced if everyone in the group shares similar interests and values. That being the case, perhaps communities are inherently homogenous to some extent, particularly if they are not tied to a physical space, and are instead formed by shared interests. In class, we were left wondering if it was possible to balance a desire to be surrounded by like-minded people, but also to experience diversity and exposure to different perspectives. I thought it was particularly enlightening when someone commented that you cannot form a community without having something in common, but having something in common doesn\u2019t necessarily mean it is a homogenous group of members. I think this applies really well to our discussion of online communities, as they might be formed around a common interest, but the group members could come from very different backgrounds. Can this ideology also be applied to some of the other communities we have studied? In those examples, is the common trait that binds people only the physical space they share?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In class on Monday we debated the validity and authenticity of communities formed or maintained online. Many people in class agreed that communities formed online produce \u201cdrive-by\u201d relationships that do not foster trust or commitment from members. However, technology can aid in maintaining pre-existing communities. For example, Facebook may help maintain ties that are formed […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":520,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-379","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cities-and-society"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/520"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=379"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=379"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=379"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/sociology-2202-fall-2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=379"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}