Turkle takes a psychoanalytical approach to online identity. Her perception is that the direction of online identity may harm the foundation of relationships. Turlke raises a good with her note, “In the past, such rapid cycling through different identities was not an easy experience to come by.”
With the ability to create online identities individuals are able to make different personas on different social networking sites to portray different parts of their personalities or fantasy self. The concern here is are people able to identify who they really are through online identity? Or are they being selective in what they disclose to get the self satisfying perception out there in cyber space?
In comparison, Baym analyzed online identity as a disembodied. Under Identity on pg.105, Baym says, “Digital media seem to separate selves from bodies, leading to disembodied identities that exist only inactions and words.”
I agree with this point because as we have discussed in previous chapters online communication is lacking the physical pieces that we gain when we are face to face. A good example was given in chapter 5, a person can pretend to be a different sex online however; to really pull that off in person would be almost impossible without radical actions.
About two weeks ago I had shared my first encounter with the MTV show “Catfish” and again I want to go back to that show as an example when we are talking about identity online. The particular episode that I watched had a man who was engaged in a yearlong online relationship with what he thought was another man. However, in the end when they met one another it turns out his online lover was really a woman. What was interesting is that the man had disclosed that he had been having an online relationship with a man to his cousin to get approval before he met his online lover in person, seeking approval of a heterosexual relationship.
Therefore, when he met up with his online lover he was disappointed that she was a woman. It was a very interesting story to watch unfold!
Turkle defines two different types of MUD’s, I would say that my semester blog analysis fits her description of the second type “consists of relatively open spaces in which you can play at whatever captures your imagination.”
My blogger posts random topics related to her lifestyle and suggestions for her followers to give their opinion or use in their lives as well.
Turkle’s work is heavily evaluating the mental influences of CMC and does not allow for casual thought or imagination to be expressed. My blogger is very casual and does not disclose inappropriate or private issues. My blogger is very open but with caution of disclosure.
I think people are selective in what they choose to disclose online. It keeps them from sharing information that people could use to harm them. It may seem like the person is hiding their true self, but it’s really just a way to protect themselves. I think you are able to identify qualities that make them who they are. The same goes for offline relationships.
I feel like I should watch this Catfish show, as it seems I’m the only person in this class who has never seen it! I have always wondered about the people who do create an entirely different version of themselves online, such as portraying themselves as a different gender or age. What are the psychological reasons behind a woman pretending to be a gay male in order to form a relationship with another man on the internet? Do the people on this show ever explain why they behaved that way? I have always been under the impression that more people were honest online rather than blatantly dishonest, so I tend to believe that a show like Catfish represents a much smaller percentage of the population than media wants us believe. However, I might be totally wrong. Thats the thing about the internet – you never really know what is happening on it!
You just never know when you are going to run into a con artist on the internet. I like to believe that most people present theirselves in a truthful way. But, one episode of Catfish I remember was where this girl had been talking to this guy for a while and they both lived in Atlanta. When the girl was supposed to meet up with the guy, the guy actually turned out to be a girl that had a beef with the other girl for talking to her boyfriend. People can be vindicitve and its not hard to believe a girl would make up a guy to get back at another girl and make her feel bad. If you have an altercation with someone and then the next day this random person starts talking to you online, I would have to be a little skeptical and make sure that other person wasn’t faking them to get back at you.
I think the post has brought up interesting points and questions with online identity. Do people now have to question the motives or the physical identity of a person they encounter online. Are more people covering up their identitys.