There are three main ways tdefinite a social networking site 1. a public profile 2. Communication between others with similar interests 3. View end transverse the connections.the readspas differ because the two authors are on two different ends of the spectrum. Beer feels the definitions lack any real…..well definition. It is too open for discussion. Easily arguable. I am more inclined to agree with Beer. I do ink that definition is far too broad to be taken as the primary definition for SNS. I have a public profile but most of my relationships, new relationships, are built through mutual friends. Even on twitter where there are millions of users I often follow people at the suggestion of someone else that I know. I am often reluctant to follow someone on any social site that I have not seen interact with someone that it rust. It is my life or portions of my life that I am putting out there for others to see, so it is important who you allow to see it. As far as interest, sites like Pinterest, would apply to Boyd and Ellisons definition but it is an interest based site. You’re able to openly view projects and such and decide if you’d like to follow.
8 thoughts on “Social Networking”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
boyd & Ellison made a distinction betweek social networks and social networking sites, indicating that the latter were channels people used to make new connections. It’s interesting that you say you use social network sites like Twitter in this way. This may prove that even boyd & Ellison’s defintion of social network sites is not completely valid. It all seems to depend on the individual user
Hey Tim, yes users are ultimately driving their control of networks vs. networking. =)
When there is not a definite line I have a hard time to understand purpose of tools. The internet is a broad tool that has so many sub sectioned avenues for users to utilize. I agree with Beer in the that the definition purposed by Boyd and Ellison is very broad and leaves to much open forum for questioning and ration.
Social networking is not just one big melting pot. On face book we can friend and unfriend, on twitter we can follow and unfollow, and same with pinterest, or any other social community or netowrking site. Therefore, the points made by Beer that social networking is not well defined by Boyd and Ellison is supported by the “control” of the user.
If you feel what you put on social sites is what you want people to see are you every scare that since it in over the internet these things can always be a retrieved. I agree Boyd and Ellison definition is too broad. If you are only willing to interact with mutual friends or people you have had contact with do you find it hard to connect with new people since that is a purpose of social network.
I strongly agree with the later parts of your statements. Some sites have members who are more open toward each other, whether they’re involved in SNSes or online communities. However, as you also stated, the members of these should always be careful about what they post on the site. Giving too much information about yourself online, as well as in “real life” situations, can potentially cause horrific or tragic consequences. This has happened in the past and, unless something’s done about it to provide more efficient monitoring or controlling, such negative events can easily happen in the future. With more and more people entering these “virtual communities”, the frequency of such may easily increase.
I feel there are many like you who have a public profile but still have most of their relationships built through mutual friends. Although there are millions of users on twitter people usually following a majority of people they know or have met in person or that someone they know has met or knows. Even though if you follow or friend strangers, the more you see information posted by them, the closer you feel to them.
I feel as though networking is to build and social networking sites are initiating
Conversations or relationships you may not have been able to initiate in real life.
Whenever I post something on social media, I simply decide whether or not the content is something I want the whole world to see. If it isn’t, I don’t post it. Another useful way to think about it is to imagine yourself as a celebrity or politician. I know that sounds ridiculous, but bear with me. If you’re a prominent figure in society, you have to – or, well, you should – constantly think about how you’re portraying yourself to the public. Because you know that limelight is on you, you have more of a reason to think carefully about what you say. Because most of us are not famous, we don’t feel that pressure. But, if we put ourselves in those shoes, and imagine that every actually was watching what we said, it makes that dilemma a much easier one to solve.