Once again this week it seems that gender roles, as much as I hate to admit it, play out in observations by researchers. Consistently, females CMC users write more words, use passive language, and are compelled to present themselves in an attractive light. Males users by contrast use fewer words, are more assertive, and tend to pick pictures of themselves that obscure their facial features in some way.  Additionally, this plays out in ethnic presentations as well. Grasmuck, Martin & Zhao (2009) explored Facebook users’ “about me” sections and found that, “ In summary, the African Americans, Latinos, and Indian ancestry students project a visual self that is dramatically more social than do Vietnamese or white students. African Americans to some extent and Latinos in particular also stand out in their greater willingness to invest in the more direct “about me” narrations than do the other three groups.”. In a previous communications course when this topic was discussed among other graduate students, several of us conjectured that minority students may be more elaborative with their online profiles as these social media platforms allow them to connect with others within their own ethnic background more frequently than they are otherwise able to do in face to face interactions. Online they are able to find and socialize with many people that share their ethnic background so they are more motivated to create a more robust online presence.

While we have already read a length about the gender differences in CMC, it only struck me today that my blogroll is 90% female bloggers. Our blog post prompt wanted us to explore what different contexts of CMC shape how we present and interpret gender and ethnicity, so I decided to review not the bloggers that I follow, by myself as interpreting these bloggers. I found out more about myself than I did the writers, when as previously stated, I discovered that I was seeking out bloggers that presented in traditionally female roles. Many of the women I follow shy away from stating any concrete opinions for fear of alienating their readers, and despite their blog purpose topics ranging from travel to music, many of them still post about fashion and celebrity culture regularly.

With regard to my interpretation of gender and ethnic backgrounds of my fellow classmates, I’ve only thought about gender as most of our names and writing styles give that away without trouble. As far as ethnicity is concerned, I haven’t thought about that as much as I might in traditional classes because I don’t see or know many of my current classmates. Other than one who as written openly about being an immigrant and bi-linguist, its been out of sight – out of mind for me this semester.

I thought the study by Huffaker and Calvert was very interesting. They analyzed Facebook profiles to see exactly how different races and ethnicities use the social networking site. What they found is that African American, Latino, and Indian participants presented themselves as much more social and involved. Caucasian and Vietnamese participants presented themselves in the least social and involved way. Analyzing “about me” sections showed that African American profiles contained many quotes about racial injustice and religion, and Latino profiles often included untranslated Spanish quotes and statements about political change. The researchers said that these uses of racially driven quotes conveyed a sense of group belonging and color consciousness.

The other study looked at how people represent their gender online. They said that females tend to avoid conflict, and say things like “I *kinda* got angry” to diffuse strong emotions or opinions. Males are less concerned with being polite, and they are more direct. The authors studied blogs, and found that both genders use emotions equally. They also discovered that males were much more open about being gay.

I honestly have not considered the race of the people in this class. It never seems like a big thing to consider, and I also know that people’s names can be misleading (my married last name is Egyptian- and yes, we have been discriminated against many times since it is has Middle Eastern roots). I think gender is usually easy to figure out, even if we can’t see people’s names. I think that the men in this class tend to write shorter posts, and the women enjoy using stories and real life scenarios to explain their points.

            Throughout the courses of many people’s lives, they possess identities that can be altered through life events and self-awareness. While it may be difficult for someone to change his or her identity in reality, it can be incredibly easy to forge one in online contexts. For example, it can be difficult for someone to hide their ethnicity or gender from the real world, but the digital world offers much more discretion and self-preservation for his or her true identity. Huffaker and Calvert mention that many physical constraints become flexible in the digital format, which proves that people should be very careful about whom they associate with online.

            CMC contexts can also show how people present and interpret race and gender. For instance, a report by Grasmuck, Martin, and Zhao explains how Ethno-Racial groups interpret themselves on cyber-space responses. They discovered that most Latinos like to post long messages, while most Indian and White individuals prefer to keep their responses shorter and made to the point. Despite the large amount of differences between races, even when they are online, this has made me think little on the differences that I more than likely have compared to my classmates. This is mainly because I prefer to judge people on their personalities rather than their race or gender. I know that makes me sound like a cheesy equality commercial, but it is true, nevertheless. One assumption that I have made from the readings is that gender and race can mean little if the user decides to create a false identity on the internet.

 The readings this week differed from Turkle’s study of MUD’s and virtual worlds primarily in that the channels of focus (including blogs and social media sites) tend to invite increased levels of self identification. Turkle’s research highlighted instances when people participated in anonymous virtual worlds to manifest sides of themselves that they couldn’t necessarily exhibit offline. Conversely, Huffaker and Calvert, as well as Grasmuck, Martin and Zhao, found that other channels, like blogs and Facebook, are often used to enhance offline identities. Grasmuck, Martin and Zhao noted that the “nonymity (similar to” identifiability”) of online environments seems to make people more “realistic and honest” in their self-presentation.” Of course, this particular quote was referring to research of internet dating sites, which like Facebook and Twitter, are much less anonymous than MUDs and virtual worlds.

In looking at teenage authored weblogs, Huffaker and Calvert found that a high percentage of teens disclose personal information about themselves, including names, age, demographic, location etc. Although this research doesn’t necessarily apply to adult bloggers, I think a similar correlation could be made. The person I’m following for my semester blog analysis is an adult male with two kids. In his blog, he gives his full name, the names of his wife and kids, his occupation, his home state, etc. He’s clearly not trying to be someone completely different in his blog than who he his offline.

The Grasmuck, Martin and Zhao reading focused on ethnic-racial displays of self identity on social networking sites. They found that Facebook is a venue in which minorities often express their heritage in a way that enhances their self-conception. Although my blogger is not a minority, I think he’s essentially doing the same thing. He focuses completely on his role as a father and a comedian, enhancing his self-conception of himself as those two roles. While it’s true he’s a father and a comedian offline, he’s also many other things: a son, employee, American, etc. Yet he chooses not to talk about these parts of himself in his blog.

For the non-grad students, the Kapidzic and Herring article explored the role of gender in online language, specifically in teen chat rooms. This article ties back into the Huffaker and Calvert reading. Kapidzic and Herring found that gender communication roles are actually more similar to traditional findings than new beliefs of gender neutrality. The authors pointed out that many teens readily identify themselves as male or female through their profile information and profile pictures. From a visual standpoint, teens are consciously making the decision to incorporate gender as a salient part of their identity. Based on my experiences, this seems to hold true in most online channels, like Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc. I’m not so sure if this would be the case in virtual worlds, where it’s much easier to remain anonymous.

Baym discusses in this chapter the threat of people and false identities when communicating online. I remember when I first began to communicate heavily online, back when myspace was the go to social network. I have met people from the internet, thankfully I have not had a “catfish” encounter but I do realize now that I am older and have heard stories of deception and tragedy, that this is not always the case. I am a very big fan of murder mystery and investigation television shows and you can always count on at least a few episodes in the series to circle around an internet relationship. That is why I named my blog, who are we when we can be anyone.

Turkle discusses the use of the internet as a means to escape reality and form a new identity. This is not the case for the blog that I chose to follow. The blogger is a traveler who has challenged herself to travel the United States and see what the country has to offer. Unlike some of the other blogs that I had the option of following, I have actually met this blogger in person. We had a chance meeting while I was at work and her personality was so dynamic and inviting and her story interesting, I decided to follow her blog. In her blog, I think that same personality that I had the pleasure of coming in contact with, shows through her posts. Call me young, naive, or unexperienced but that optimist in me believes that generally people are who they say they are. That is not to say that I trust everything that I hear, but I do believe in giving the benefit of the doubt as opposed to coming into the communication distrusting. I have had the pleasure of meeting amazing people via the internet and can honestly say that I would again.

After reading both Baym and Turkle, I realized that a lot of people really do not have an identity when using online communication. How do we really know who posts blogs and comments are really who they say they are? Some people post profile pictures, but even then it can always be a false picture. So what exactly are people doing to make sure identities within online communication is accurate? I’ve been watching this show called “Catfish,” on MTV and it is about a guy who helps people who are in online relationships find out the true identities of their secret lovers/admirers. I believe in that type of situation no one should have to step in and help another person determine the identity of another. There are hundreds of ways in todays technology to determine if the person you are chatting with is real or not. The blog that I am following is about helath care and politics which is created through a woman named Maggie Mahar. I do believe that her identity is exactly who she says she is and her background as well. Her thiughts and commnets about public health and the economy confirm that she is absolutely serious about these issues. Baym and Turkle are pretty much trying to come up with ways to seek true identity of online profilers and better ways for people to reveal themselves. It is all about whether or not a person is willing to be honest and approachable towrds people they associate with online.

I am going to start by discussing my blogger. She is a very outgoing, loving, passionate runner, mother, friend, and wife. All of her blogs are very positive and uplifting. (Which they should be, right?) Well, that is the great thing about communicating online, especially on a blog, you can make yourself LOOK good. You do not have to include the bad; therefore, the happy-go-lucky self is exposed, constantly. Turkle comments by saying that cycling through all the different aspects of ones personality is not a common experience. My point also being, how can you show who you really are through an online identity? You truly, truly can’t.

Byam asks in this chapter, “when people’s bodies aren’t visible, will people lie about who they are? Can they be trusted? Can they be known?” This perception of people is in the hands of each one of us. Some people trust online identities too much and end up troubled, hurt, and full of doubt.

I think that both Byam and Turkle are trying to raise awareness of online identities and how easy one can alter their own identity, whether for good, bad, or just experimentation. It is a scary thought knowing that Byam provided many examples of people falling for false social identities and potentially placing a danger in their life. These articles reminded me of when I was probably in middle school, investigating and experimenting with chat rooms and completely fooling someone else with my true identity. Although, my memories were purely innocent, some are not.

I am pretty confident to say that my blogger is telling the truth (maybe not the WHOLE truth about the negative part of her life). She posts pictures A LOT and that would be a difficult thing to fake. :)

Turkle underlines the point of fragmented identity by showing explicit examples of people fulfilling specific roles in MUDs. People are able to present more online, where there are multiple platforms to express each interests.  “Many people experience identity as a set of roles that can be mixed and matched, whose diverse demands need to be negotiated” (Turkle, 180).  Turkle presents that people are made of many complex layers. Life in virtual worlds can clue us into broader behavior patterns. If it is true for MUDs, maybe it can us a generalized perspective on CMC behavior. It seems to resonate with standing communication theories on social and relational behavior.

The CMC mentioned in Turkle’s work is much older and a different platform than a blog. Her work focuses on more direct interaction in chatrooms, websites, and MUD’s virtual worlds. She presents a sort of psychoanalysis of specific types of users. While I appreciate this insight, it is a different type of identity formation and presentation.  Baym’s ideas hit on broader aspects of identity. We construct a public version of our selves through a series of cues (or omission) for more impression management and a more crafted version of our selves. Turkle made an interesting point related to the construction of the self. Are we creating a new fictionalized and idealized projection, or are we enhancing ourselves?  Are we creating an “expanded” self or a “separate self” (Turkle, 180).

My blogger, Jodi, has a very coherent identity. She presents herself in a positive, clear, and professional manner. Her identity is revealed through her constructed persona, and she comes across as a likeable person.  Jodi’s style of writing is simple but engaging, and it to create a connection with readers. Her bubbly and quirky personality comes across in her writing style, stories, content, images, and interaction.

A public blog isn’t as direct and personal of an interaction, like there would be in chats. Individualized chats can result in deceptive conversations , misleading perceptions, and exaggerated interpretations. A blogger, however, must exude a particular personality to everyone. I think she respects the medium, the content, and her audience enough to present a genuine, expanded version of herself online. And I respect it.

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.

Turtle believes that people have many different identities through different parts of their life.  She talks about how people become who they want online as if they step into virtual world and become their hearts desires.  In many ways this is true because no one online know that you’re not who you say you are so it allows you to look within yourself and become someone that you many actually be afraid of becoming. Baym agrees with Turtle concept of identity and that when in the virtual world we develop a new identity which allows people to choice who they want to be. Baym actually quotes Turtle on page 107 regarding “the self is no longer simply playing a different role in different settings at different times.” Baym points out a good point that many people have relationships online which may be due to a lie being told and many try to use this a proof for a divorce however, physically nothing was done other than each other expressing words. She also states that with the use of avatars someone could steal but can that person be held accountable? As we develop these new identities does that give us a lead way to actually do what we want to do because we know that it is not reality?

CMC context in Turtle work differ from the blog that I am following. Turtle discuss that the internet is used as a way to escape reality and form the identity that you may have been suppressing. However, my blogger is not forming a new identity she is opening the door to herself to allow you to see her true side or identity. She is not escaping reality she is trying to show everyone what she consider to be normal. She present her identity to be as another, wife and friend and does not give the impress that she has taken on other roles or identities.