Culture of the Internet

Sara Kiesler

• Publisher: Psychology Press
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781317780373
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

As we begin a new century, the astonishing spread of nationally and internationally accessible computer-based communication networks has touched the imagination of people everywhere. Suddenly, the Internet is in everyday parlance, featured in talk shows, in special business "technology" sections of major newspapers, and on the covers of national magazines. If the Internet is a new world of social behavior it is also a new world for those who study social behavior. This volume is a compendium of essays and research reports representing how researchers are thinking about the social processes of electronic communication and its effects in society. Taken together, the chapters comprise a first gathering of social psychological research on electronic communication and the Internet. The authors of these chapters work in different disciplines and have different goals, research methods, and styles. For some, the emergence and use of new technologies represent a new perspective on social and behavioral processes of longstanding interest in their disciplines. Others want to draw on social science theories to understand technology. A third group holds to a more activist program, seeking guidance through research to improve social interventions using technology in domains such as education, mental health, and work productivity. Each of these goals has influenced the research questions, methods, and inferences of the authors and the "look and feel" of the chapters in this book. Intended primarily for researchers who seek exposure to diverse approaches to studying the human side of electronic communication and the Internet, this volume has three purposes:
* to illustrate how scientists are thinking about the social processes and effects of electronic communication;
* to encourage research-based contributions to current debates on electronic communication design, applications, and policies; and
* to suggest, by example, how studies of electronic communication can contribute to social science itself.

Part II

ELECTRONIC GROUPS

In chapter 2, Lee Sproull and Samer Faraj argued that electronic groups that form and meet using electronic communication are a compelling feature of this technology. The authors in this section explore the behavior and relationships of people in electronic groups. A central feature of many electronic groups is that they exist completely within the network, having no external counterpart outside of the messages and other electronic information the members exchange by computer. This feature makes these relationships somewhat like those of the time-honored “pen pals,” but unlike pen pals, a person’s electronic group relationships can include tens, hundreds, or thousands of people.

The most common electronic group until a few years ago was one in which employees in a corporation with access to a company network or the Internet formed a group online (Sproull & Kiesler, 1991). Although the group members had normal organizational duties and responsibilities in the organization of their employment, these duties could extend through the network to people in other such organizations with whom the employee had work-related needs for discourse and discussion. Collaboratively authored documents flowed back and forth through the network, residing in different versions here or there in various host machines, eventually wending their way to dissemination or publication. Employees often had extensive discussion as well via private person-to-person electronic mail.

With the rise of commercial online services and electronic communication from homes, people have begun to participate in electronic groups just for personal communication, pleasure, and help. The chapters in this section are a sample of the growing body of research about the personal exchanges that take place in electronic groups. In chapter 5, Nancy Baym studies the communications and norms of an electronic group over time. She uses the method of ethnography (a collection of participant observation techniques originally developed by anthropologists and sociologists). She shows how the group extends the functionality of television technology through the exchange by members of TV soap digests and reviews. More important, however, is the feeling of community that builds in this group of people who have never met face-to-face. In chapters 7 and 8, two researchers from quite different perspectives write about MUDs, or multiuser domains (also called multiuser dungeons and MOOs—multiuser object-oriented domains). MUDs are electronic meeting places where people gather to talk and play simultaneously. Pavel Curtis, a computer scientist, discusses the operation and governance of the largest existing MUD; Curtis’ observations are unique because he is the creator and moderator of the MUD. Sherry Turkle, an anthropologist, discusses MUDs as they affect individuals’ perceptions of others and themselves. Chapter 8, by Kristin Mickelson, continues the discussion of the effects of electronic groups on individuals. Her survey research on how parents of exceptional children seek social support on the Internet was a fortuitous consequence of being unable to find enough ordinary research participants. Turning to the Internet for research subjects not only increased her sample size but also allowed her to observe some tantalizing differences between parents who participate in social support groups on the Internet and those who don’t.

Chapter 9, by Barry Wellman, discusses the use of sociological social network theory to understand electronic groups. The concept of “group” needs to be reconsidered and possibly redefined in light of our observations of large electronic groups. Electronic groups with highly fluid membership, obscure boundaries, and very large size don’t fit theories of small groups very well. Wellman argues that social network theories and techniques, which have been used successfully to study diffuse neighborhoods and communities, might be a useful approach to understand such groups.

REFERENCE

Sproull, L. S., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

5

INTERPRETING SOAP OPERAS AND CREATING COMMUNITY: INSIDE AN ELECTRONIC FAN CULTURE

Nancy K. Baym

Wayne State University

This chapter examines the traditions of a very successful newsgroup, rec.arts.tv.soaps (r.a.t.s). R.a.t.s has created a folklore with some similarities to other newsgroups, and some traditions uniquely its own. Posters in the group have adapted features of electronic communication, such as subject lines and punctuation marks, to demark subgroups, define genres, and express emotion. Members of r.a.t.s are rewarded for humorous, insightful, individualistic, and considerate performances. Though dispersed in space and time, they are a true community that sustains relationships and keeps members interested, even when the soaps themselves are boring.

Early conceptions of the folk group required shared location and unmediated interaction. This chapter examines a highly successful electronic discussion group, or “newsgroup,” about American day-time television soap operas—Rec.arts.tv.soaps. (“r.a.t.s”). R.a.t.s is a group with a distinct folklore, yet it is distributed in the form of electronic messages through the USENET network of groups on the Internet. More recent conceptions of the folk group require only that groups share a common factor and unique traditions (Dundes, 1965), or that traditions are grounded in distinct shared rules for the conduct and interpretation of speech (Hymes, 1986). Computer-mediated groups share the topics around which they organize, the system that links them, and the communication that passes between them. These three sets of resources seem sufficient to create distinct ways of speaking, and hence distinctive folk groups and folkloric traditions.

This chapter begins with an overview of my own relationship to the group and my methods of inquiry. Second, I turn to the group’s technical and participatory structure, looking in particular at the ways these structures mitigate the spatial-temporal separation of group members. Third, I look at some of the emergent traditions in r.a.t.s. Finally, I look at performance in r.a.t.s, asking how performance is evaluated.

METHOD

R.a.t.s is one of the oldest and most successful USENET newsgroups. It began in 1984 when it split off from the television newsgroup (then called “net.tv”). Non-soap fans became annoyed at the excessive soap opera discussion, and the soap opera fans moved to create their own group, “net.tv.soaps.” “Rec.arts” was substituted for “net” a few years later as newsgroups multiplied and the hierarchical system used to name them expanded. R.a.t.s now ranks between 200th and 300th in estimated readership (of many thousands of newsgroups). R.a.t.s was one of the first groups to pass the 100,000 article mark.

The work discussed here is part of an ongoing ethnographic study of communication in the r.a.t.s newsgroup community. My positions in the group are those of a participant and a researcher. As a longtime fan of soap operas, I was thrilled to discover this group. It was only after I had been reading daily and participating regularly for a year that I began to write about it. As the work has evolved, I have shared its progress with the group members and found them exceedingly supportive and helpful.

The data for this study were obtained from three sources. In October 1991, I saved all the messages that appeared on r.a.t.s; I collected more messages in 1993. Eighteen participants responded to a questionnaire I posted to r.a.t.s. Personal email correspondence with 10 other r.a.t.s participants provided further information. I posted two notices to the group explaining the project and offering to exclude posts by those who preferred not to be involved. No one declined to participate.

GROUP STRUCTURE

USENET. R.a.t.s is shaped by its host, USENET (see chap. 2). For instance, because the number of messages passing through USENET is enormous, many sites store messages for only a few days or weeks. This ethereal quality of messages in many ways makes them more like talk than like writing. The conversationality of USENET also is fostered by newsreader designs and accompanying normative conventions that invoke social contexts for messages. I focus in particular on the role of the quotation system and headers in overcoming spatial and temporal separation and thus facilitating the creation of social context and community.

When one responds to a message in a newsgroup, most newsreaders make it easy to quote, cut, or edit the entire earlier post. Social conventions across USENET groups dictate that one should quote posts to which one is replying, and then cut quotes to the minimal length necessary to ground one’s remarks. The ability to imbed previous talk in new contributions allows people to understand responses to posts they have not yet seen (Raymond, 1991). The quotation system also allows ideas to remain attributed to their original writers. Ownership and attribution of ideas associate discourse with particular individuals. Context is created anew in each post that uses quotation. Messages are thus situated in ongoing streams of personalized discussion, much like face-to-face talk. Context also is created by headers appearing at the top of every post.¹

Participation. R.a.t.s participants are primarily women. Judging from the headers of 1 month’s r.a.t.s posts, of the 492 people who contributed, 60% were clearly women, 20% were clearly male, and another 20% had addresses that left gender ambiguous. Assuming r.a.t.s is approximately 72% female and 28% male, the group reflects the gender demographics of American soap opera viewers (Alexander, Carveth, Ryan, & Bohrer, 1992). The r.a.t.s participants claim for the most part to be between the ages of 20 and 50 years.

R.a.t.s participants are well educated, as in most of the Internet (see chap. 19). Many who responded to the questionnaire and email have or are pursuing advanced degrees. Most read newsgroups while at work or school, often checking in several times each day. That they are at work means, of course, that they are not at home watching soap operas. They videotape soaps and save them for evenings and weekends, if they watch them at all.

There are two ways to participate in any newsgroup, including r.a.t.s. Lurking involves reading without ever contributing; posting means writing messages. Of 492 posters in October 1991, 187 posted only once during the month, 185 posted 2 to 5 times, 73 posted 6 to 10 times, and 45 posted more than 10 times. The 187 one-time posters sent 9% of the total messages, whereas those 45 who posted more than 10 times sent 44%. This demonstrates that a small group of people does most of the performing. Furthermore, the most prolific on r.a.t.s tend to maintain that position over time, and play powerful roles in shaping group tradition. They generate most of the discourse and carry the highest name recognition. Norms implied by and embedded in their messages carry a good deal of persuasiveness.

TRADITION

Traditionalization occurs through a group’s communicative practice. As traditional ways of speaking emerge, so do conventions about how to mark speech. Conventionalized markings and groupings of discourse determine how speech is to be interpreted, yet are usually highly efficient and minute in comparison to the discourse as a whole (Hymes, 1975). Two of the conventionalized systems in r.a.t.s use marking components in the subject line to frame messages.

Indicating message type with conventionalized subject line components is common across USENET groups. Talk is often differentiated into an unmarked category and one or more marked categories. “Rec.food.recipes,” for instance, distinguishes posted recipes from requests for recipes with the inclusion of “REQUEST:” or “RECIPE:” in the subject line. Almost all groups have a subject line labeled “FAQ” (Frequently Asked Questions) to explain group norms and facilitate new users’ entry. Subject line conventions allow people to make informed choices about what to read, and hence in which events to participate.

Cueing Soap Opera. Participants in r.a.t.s use the initials of each soap opera in the subject lines to subdivide the group inte...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• I. THE NET AS IT WAS AND MIGHT BECOME
• II. ELECTRONIC GROUPS
• III. POWER AND INFLUENCE
• IV. COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK
• V. NETWORKED ORGANIZATIONS
• VI. DIFFERENCES IN ACCESS AND USAGE
• About the Authors
• Author Index
• Subject Index