In the Huffaker and Calvert study, the researchers observed a group of teenagers to see if there were on-line language differences among genders related to the disclosure of real-world personal information, emotive features used for expression, expressions of sexual identity, and the tone of the blogs. On the other hand, Grassmuck, Martin & Zhao looked at online communication differences related to race and ethnicity. The former concentrated on WWW blogs while the latter reviewed Facebook communication. Huffaker and Calvert found very little differences among male and females in the way they expressed themselves online. The Huffaker and Calvert article states, “Interestingly, the blogs created by young males and females are more alike than different”. Grassmuck, Martin, & Zhao did find significant differences in the way different ethnic groups communicate on Facebook. The Grasmuck, Martin, and Zhao article states that “We also found that in a nonymous environment like Facebook, identity claims regarding the extensiveness of social networks appear to be grounded in offline realities”.
Different CMC contexts, however, shape how people present and interpret race and gender. The Grasmuck, Martin and Zhao article states “The intensive investments of minorities in presenting highly social, culturally explicit, and elaborated narratives of self in the Facebook profiles are consistent with preoccupations about and heightened awareness of racial identities”. When studying different CMC contexts, it has been shown that in online communications where identity is less overt there is a tendency to recreate personalities.
I have not thought about the gender and race of the people I am interacting with in class because more important than gender and race is the content of the communication. If they have an interesting post, I am not concerned with their race and gender. I have not made any assumptions about the people I interact with in class.
My biggest take away from all of these readings was, to borrow the quote you used, “…in a nonymous environment like Facebook, identity claims regarding the extensiveness of social networks appear to be grounded in offline realities.” I certainly agree with the notion that the Manti Te’o cases are not the norm. Most people willingly identify themselves via social media profiles that can be linked to their offline selves.
The difference is that, online, people focus more on enhancing their offline self-image. For instance, many people only post pictures of themselves they like. Offline, you have much less control over how someone sees you. Let’s say you aren’t feeling well one day. If you go out in public, people will see you. Conversely, it’s unlikely someone will post of picture of themselves in such a state to their Facebook profile.
With photoshop and other digital photo alteration services, its easier than ever to manipulate online images of yourself to appear more attractive. However, I see this as an extension of a larger trend. Magazine covers of models and other celebrities have long been able to alter photographs to feature the star in the best possible light. This doesn’t stop us from watching them on the red carpet or on live TV where the forgiving airbrush isn’t present, but anytime there is the opportunity to make an image of oneself more attractive with a low cost, I think most will take advantage.
Like you stated in your blog, CMC contexts do have the potential to change how people present and interpret physical attributes like race or gender. Before this lesson, I did not think that race even mattered in online chat sessions, especially since it is so easy to change your identity when online, silimar to what was expressed in your statements. After this, however, I found out that racism and sexism are just as big of issues online as they are in today’s society. This is most likely the main reason equality is a primary focus in today’s world. I just hope it doesn’t all come back to kick us in the behind. Sadly, many of the online sites are too indicative of negative aspects of our current national conditions.
I enjoyed the study on Facebook, because it opened my eyes up to the fact that Facebook is actually so limiting. Instead of connecting lots of new people together, such as an internet dating site or a random chat room, for the most part Facebook simply connects people who are already have an existing offline link. Friends, relatives, friends of a friend, etc, are generally who people interact with on Facebook, therefore people are traveling in the same circles online as they are offline. I had not thought about the racial implications of this until I read this survey, but I realized that it is something that affects the world. If the effects are bad, good or minimal, though, remains to be seen.