Critical Reflection

Although I have more than one social networking profile, I will focus my analysis on my facebook as I have had facebook longer than both twitter and instagram and feel as though it relates to many of the topics we have focused on during the social media module. I created my facebook in 2009 and currently have 998 friends, most of which I have never met. My profile picture is a photo of myself at a restaurant in Islington, London. Most of my facebook friends consist of school-friends, family, other people I have met in person and some people that I have never met and probably never will. I am also going to compare my facebook with twitter and instagram as this will give more of an insight into the different (self)-representations I may portray.

Essentially, a users facebook profile is a (self)-representation. I think I am portrayed very differently on my twitter compared to my facebook. I only have 228 followers on twitter. This is mainly because I use it less frequently and most of my tweets have little news value to people. Twitter is a lot more personal and could be seen almost as a diary or log. Users of facebook are able to see people's interests, employment status, relationship status and so on. This means that users are often able to tell what class the person is or social status they behold. However, this is not always accurate as it is up to the person what information they want to share with their friends. Many people only share the information that represents them in the way they would like to be perceived rather than an accurate representation of them in person. If someone that didn't know me well looked at my profile they would probably assume I was quite an extrovert, sociable person due to the fact I have nearly 1,000 friends and I am tagged in many images of me with groups of friends. However, I think I am actually quite an introvert person and think friendship is about quality over quantity. The real ideologies and identities of facebook users are usually blurred due to the ability of picking and choosing what about them is displayed. The codes and conventions of websites such as facebook and twitter are also very uniform with simple layouts and basic colours used. Users do not have much freedom with design which means they have to conform to the conventions already set in place. 

Social capital refers to the “resources accumulated through the relationships between people', it is an 'elastic term with a variety of definitions in multiple fields, conceived of as both a cause and an effect' (Nicole Ellison 2007 The Benefits of Facebook “Friends” Vol 12, No 4) Gaining social capital on facebook is easy as one only has to add a few friends. However bridging social capital and bonding social capital are two different things that can alter a users online social experience. Bridging social capital is when users have loose connections or 'weak ties'. These online friendships may provide useful information but there is no emotional support. Bonding social capital is when a user has online friends that are tightly knit and have close relationships. These usually consist of family and close friends. Maintained social capital is also something that facebook provides as it maintains the valuable connections as life changes at a relatively low cost with little involvement. This means that it is easier for friends to stay in touch on facebook. It simply takes a post on someone's wall. According to Marx in Capital (Vol I, part III) “Labour is, in the first place, a process in which both man and nature participate, and in which man of his own accord starts, regulates and controls the material re-actions between himself and nature” This could be used to describe our engagement with anything that we do. In this case, the use of social media.

Social media websites have also allowed for TV to have another platform where audience members can communicate and take part in competitions and extras. Participatory culture plays a huge part in society today with hashtags being extremely popular and appearing on most television programmes today. TV shows and celebrities also have their own facebook pages where people can find out more about their interest and spread the word about it. This 'second screen' allows users to get involved. An example of this could be on Channel 4 show 'Big Fat Gypsy Weddings' where the hashtag 'gypsyholiday' was shown right in the opening shot. This allows people to find common interest and follow/make friends with this person as the users have things in common.

The article “Conclusion” (Twitter: social communication in the Twitter age Murthy, Dhiraj) discusses how twitter is used as a way for people to self-promote themselves. This could also apply to Facebook. There is almost an innate need inside human beings to feel involved and liked. Due to this, it is not uncommon for people to want to gain as many followers on twitter as possible or to get as many likes on a status on facebook as they can. Once a status or image is posted onto facebook, it is there out in the open for everyone to critique. It also means that images or words that were the users to begin with can be used or manipulated by others. About a year ago instagram, facebook and twitter changed their copyright laws. What this means is that users can take any image posted to a social website and use it as they wish. The TV show Catfish on MTV looked into the team of people who discover fake profiles using other people's photos, trace them down and meet them. The show reinforces how careful you have to be when using social networking sites and who can see them. A few months ago I had this happen to me and it was a very strange experience. However due to it happening quite often to people, there is now an option to report someone as they are 'pretending to be me/someone I know'. Not only was this person using my images on facebook, but they also had their own instagram profile. This persons “(self)-representation” wasn't a self representation at all. In a way, they were representing me in another strange way. What I found strange was the fact that this person had quite a few followers despite the fact the images they were using were not of them.

Social networking sites have also meant that people now have more influence over others. If a famous person tweets about something they like, a majority of their fans will tweet them agreeing. This could be seen as a negative or a positive, depending on what the person is saying. However, it could be argued that some views that famous people share are always pro or positive so that they do not get in trouble. This then depersonalises the tweet as it could not be their beliefs or ideologies at all.

I have critically explored how a users online version of him or her is usually mediated and does not completely portray their true self. I did this by exploring the texts and articles that delve into many social networking aspects that I looked into during the social media module. To conclude, social networking has many positive aspects in that it enables users to stay connected and involved however as I have explained, there are also some negative sides to social networking.

Nicole Ellison 2007 The Benefits of Facebook “Friends” (Vol 12, No 4)

Marx 1876 Capital (Vol I, part III)

Murthy, Dhiraj 2012 'Conclusion (Twitter: social communication in the Twitter age)' 

http://news.sky.com/story/1027084/instagram-pic-policy-change-prompts-backlash (instagram copyright terms of service change)

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/big-fat-gypsy-weddings/4od
(Big fat gypsy weddings)

500 essay (3)

Sharing Nicely

This text focuses on the idea of shareable goods and looks into the benefits and disadvantages of something like this. The article focuses on cars and computers as these are areas in which shareable goods are successful. The sharing is very impersonal as it is done between people that do not know each other. The sharing is not done in tightly knit communities as there is a large volume of the items available. Shareable goods allow the cost of the item to be shared between a number of people which in the end, works out cheaper for people. Using cars as an example, it would make more sense for someone to share a car with others if they are not going to use it often and pay a smaller amount.

We now need social sharing as financial problems mean that people are unable to fully own items solely for themselves. Social sharing becomes a necessity for some. Supporting this point, the text says “social sharing and exchange is becoming a common modality of producing valuable desiderata at the very core of the most advanced economies…”

Also mentioned is the music industry and it's copy-right laws “if indeed we live in an economic system made up of price-based…”. With everything online being so easily accessible since the creation of web 2.0, it is now simpler and quicker than ever to send and share music with friends and others. Especially as each copy of a will sound identical, sharing music rather than paying money for it seems the most cost effective approach.

Although it sounds great and adds a social aspect to the idea of networking and being online, this could be seen as a negative as the music industry will continue to lose money. However there are also benefits of other types of sharable goods. A benefit of this, noted by the text, is the idea that transaction costs would be higher but due to social sharing it is a lot less likely to take place. This is a positive as it will save people money as they are not being bought by market-based systems.

The text overall has a positive view towards social sharing. It has a very relatable feel as it focuses on day to day items such as cars and computers which could be seen as must have items today. Although things like file sharing with music and other things you would normally have to pay for being a negative side to social sharing, I think that overall the idea of social sharing is very positive as people will be able to have things they wouldn't usually be able to afford.