According to Rheingold, an online community is “a social relationship aggregation, facilitated by Internet-based technology, in which users communicate and build personal relationships” (as cited in Lin & Lee, 2006). It is driven, more or less, by the same motivations that drive the gift economy. This includes anticipated reciprocity, increased recognition, sense of efficacy, and communion – understandable driving forces of the online community, as it is one of the platforms upon which the gift economy is built.
Communication
From the aforementioned definition of an online community, it is my opinion that social networking sites like Twitter are online communities. This is apparent upon my signing up for an account with Twitter. After submitting the necessary information about myself, I was asked to provide an update about what I was doing. This would enable me to inform my friends about my current activities and thoughts. Furthermore, I could keep in touch with my friends and receive updates from them “via phone or instant messaging” (“Wikipedia: Twitter”, 2007).
Interpersonal Relationships
The fact that Twitter is bringing about a convergence of communication media makes it clear that its main purpose is to increase interaction and foster interpersonal relationships between its members. According to Boorstin, “the advance of technology brings nations together and narrows the differences between the experiences of their people” (Fernbeck, & Thompson, 1995). Twitter is such advancement in technology as it has successfully removed the barriers of geographical distance and time difference. Thus, its provision for communication and interaction via the Internet makes it an online community.
The result of being able to communicate and interact over Twitter is apparent from the public discussions or private conversations that can be carried out for as long as it is desired with “sufficient human feeling”, leading to the formation of “webs of personal relationships” (“Wikipedia: Virtual Community”, 2007).
Pseudonyms & Reputation Management
The only thing that sets Twitter and its ilk apart from traditional communities besides the absence of a physical presence is the use of pseudonyms. Having studied about online identities, I have learned that pseudonyms are popular as they enable individuals to build reputations for themselves, and continually interact with others online. Consequently, as pseudonyms are inherent in online communities, it is safe to say that Twitter is such a community as well.
In addition, it should be noted that any sort of online identity requires reputation management. On Twitter, the number of friends and followers a person has is indicative of his or her reputation. Since reputation management is “the process of tracking an entity’s actions and other entities’ opinions about those actions” (“Wikipedia: Reputation management, 2007); Twitter’s “Public Timeline” which enables others to monitor a person’s communications on Twitter and his or her friends’ replies, makes it an online community.
In conclusion, Twitter is an online community as it allows for the communication and interaction of individuals, creates interpersonal relationships over time, employs pseudonyms, and requires reputation management.
References
Fernback, J., & Thompson, B. (May, 1995). Virtual Communities: Abort, Retry, Failure?. Retrieved March 14, 2007 from http://www.rheingold.com/texts/techpolitix/VCcivil.html
Lin, H., & Lee, G. (December, 2006). Determinants of success for online communities: an empirical study. Behavior & Information Technology, 25, 6, 479-488.
Online community. (2007, March 14). In Wikipedia, The Free encyclopedia. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_community
Reputation management. (2007, March 1). In Wikipedia, The Free encyclopedia. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reputation_management
Twitter. (2007, March 14). In Wikipedia, The Free encyclopedia. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment