Meeting people online is complicated, because you have to wonder if the person you are meeting is the person they say they really are. It is hard to trust or to believe everything that is online. There is more room to lie online than in person. You can hide many things or pose as someone you are not. Being in the privacy of your home and being online with no one else watching might give someone the liberty or freedom to lie. Yet, there are those that might feel more comfortable being even more honest than they would be in person. This depends from person to person, because the affordances are different.

I find the virtual games very interesting, because it does give people the opportunity to play different roles. To what point do they believe they are really those other people? Also, sometimes being someone other than yourself might be so satisfying that it becomes addicting to play on these virtual sites. “Role playing games can serve in this advocate capacity because they stand betwixt and between the unreal and real: they are a game and something more” (Turkle, 1995).  A player described his playing as becoming more than the person they play “you are who you pretend to be”. This was very interesting because I imagine this is how they find satisfaction in virtual role playing.

The blog that I am looking at shows some characteristics of online role playing and the type of identity they are trying to portray, but I think only to a certain extent. My blogger is a first time mom, and I am sure she portrays herself as a good mother, or a new mother who is trying her best to be great, but I doubt she would write something that would make her look like a horrible mother. Then she would have child services at her door by now. She is playing the role of the character of the title of her blog. However, it is still her because in real life she is still this mother, but maybe online she might be this super exiciting mom, or maybe what we see is what we get. It is hard to say without knowing the person, but from what I have read she seems like a really cool mom. And maybe blogging gives her the freedom and opportunity to be more honest than she would be in person because she has time to think, reason, and write about her thoughts on motherhood. Just my opinion.

All studies in this assignment agree that the internet and the new technologies related to this communication media have significantly affected communication in our society. However, differences exist in the perception of those studying these phenomena, regarding its effect on interpersonal relationships. Moreover, the overall message from these studies suggests that the Internet and new technologies actually bring people together. Reinie and Wellman (chapter 1) conclude that “networking individualism” has created opportunities for people to expand beyond their traditional close groups, increased communication powers and information capabilities, provided at will access to people and friends, and allows society to connect beyond traditional groups. Baym states, “the very existence of an interactive medium that connects people across space gives rise to new connections” (Baym 148). In the case of Peter and Trudy, internet technology allowed them to reach a bigger network of people and allowed them to receive the valuable support of their online village. The Lenhart et al. article supports the belief that new technology such as texting plays a huge role in keeping teenagers and their parents connected. For the teens it’s the best way to stay connected with friends. For parents it’s a great way to stay connected with their children. They feel safe in knowing they can always reach their children. Nevertheless, reliable studies do not indicate that society’s embrace of these new technologies has had any effect on precluding traditional face to face contacts and dependence on close relationships.

There was nothing that shocked or confused me about these studies. Rather, the result of the studies supported my perception derived through personal experience with technology in my interpersonal relationships. The internet has not significantly affected the quality of my relationships or the quantity of face to face contacts with those I care about. I consider myself a member of the “networked individualism” group as defined by Reinie and Wellman. I am, like most people in my age group, a heavy texter and frequent user of social media. I have a social network of about 400 friends and acquaintances; However, I use face to face interactions just about as much as I do texting. My personal experience supports the results of Ling’s research which states there is no proof of direct relationship between the increase use of internet communication and social isolation.

We desire connection, and also feel an obligation to be connected. This creates a duality of satisfaction in our relationships. However, if we can strike the balance, the tradeoff is worth the effort (Hall & Baym, 328). We can create wider, more diverse social networks can help to collectively create stronger bond with society. We can find more support in “looser and more fragmented” networks, and these networks can also be broader, more diverse, and collectively stronger than traditional groups ever permitted (Rainie & Wellman 8).

I loved the presentation of the Rainie and Wellman article. It made me realize the wondrous nature of this growing social structure. It gives me hope for humanity; we can rally around ideas, similarities, and threads of concern. We can rise above traditional group structures and connect with each other. We are at the root of our social networks. We create the connections that are an extension of our selves. They have the power to highlight our qualities. They can make us better neighbors, to reach out to others to seek and gain support.  We become more independent, and more enabled to choose our own paths.  Our stance as an individual empowers us to make endless choices around our interests and activities.  Our behavior isn’t forcibly coerced by traditional social groupings. These constraints do not apply to our personal liberty. “Person-to-person networks show how community has transcended group boundaries. It is the individual- and not the household, kinship group, or work group- that is the primary unit of connectivity. The shift puts people at the center of personal networks that can supply them with support, sociability, information, and a sense of belonging” (Rainie & Wellman, 124).

The issue of isolation rose again. We have discussed this numerous times on the blog, and it has appeared in various articles.  There are universal anxieties and we will continually blame new technologies for causing changes. We fear the unknown and we always seek a scapegoat to our problems. Nonetheless, all of the readings tend to point that we are more socially connected, whether the ties are weak or the content deep. The rise of networks has affected our interpersonal relations. “This is not a shift toward social isolation, but toward flexible autonomy” (Rainie & Wellman 125).

The internet expands your scope. The more you see and interact, the less alone you feel. We are not necessarily isolated, as our interests can resonate with others in the larger circle of humanity. I enjoyed the Pope’s quote that illustrates this cross-cultural connection:  “New technologies allow people to meet each other beyond the confines of  space and of their own culture, creating in this way an entirely new world of potential friendships” (Rainie & Wellman, 127 ).

I must confess I occasionally think technology leads to isolation, but the more I read, the more I realize this is not the case.  The internet does not necessarily lead us into isolation away from society. We just become engaged in a new form; the more engaged we are, the more involved we become online and off (Rainie & Wellman, 119). If we take advantage of our networking capabilities, there are endless sources for connection. I never thought isolation was the fault of the technology; it is in our individual use of the technology. My personal use is an exaggeration of my natural behavior. I still choose to play the role and use technology to my own design. If I lurk and am hesitant to post, that reflects my own anxieties of expression/acceptance/worth. Technology allows for an extension of my current self, with different boundaries and expectation.  Yet, I still have the ability to seek answers from others. The information that fits my needs is already there. If I chose to be more interactive, the potential is endless. It boils down to my individual choice to take advantage of these available networks. I don’t consider myself to be incredibly networked, comparatively. But, I do realize that I have to potential to be; it’s a matter of interest and dedication. Online social networking only further expands the possibilities.

The overall theme of these readings is that, while society has a fear that new technology will isolate us from social interaction, the truth is that we are still as socially connected as we ever were. People have historically been afraid of new technology. Rainie and Wellmen even comment on this, saying that people fail to realize that all technological advancements, such as the train, telephone or airplane, have changed or reshaped communities and interpersonal relationships before. The internet and new technologies are no different than the telephone. They will definitely change how we as humans interact, but they certainly won’t destroy relationships. In fact, Rainie and Wellmen point out that “Internet use does not pull people away from public places, but rather is associated with frequent visits to parks, cafes and restaurants…” (119) Its especially interesting that, according to Baym, “greater use of cell phones to call and text close friends leads to higher expectations that friends will use mobiles for relational maintenance” (Hall and Baym, 317-318) Now that we have the ability to stay in connect, we not only use it but are expected to use it. This technology is forming stronger bonds, not destroying them.

Of course, teenagers and the younger generation are adapting more quickly to this new technological lifestyle. In Ling’s 2010 study, I found it interesting that teenagers were considered to be less socially active because of their frequent texting. Ling pointed out the fact that teens were not asked about their social interaction habits while they were at school, but only their habits outside of school. I know that when I was in high school, I was very social during the day, but at night I would rarely talk on the phone to my friends. I wasn’t allowed phone calls until my homework was finished, and I was not allowed to instant message. I would think teenagers now actually have a lot more social interaction outside of school, because they can text, email, and Facebook with their friends quickly. Of course, the flip side of internet use is the fear of internet abuse.I found Lenhart’s study on cyberbullying to be fascinating. When I was in elementary and high school, people were cruel and there were bullies. Instead of posting mean things about each other on the internet, bullying happened in different ways, such as spreading rumors on the playground or in notes in class. The internet has given bullies a different place to bully, but it is still the same action. Of course, offline bullying is still happening, and the study even indicated that it is currently happening more than online bullying. It is a sad fact of life that bullies exist, but unfortunately they do, and that is not the internet’s fault.

Overall, the fear of social destruction at the hands of the internet is unfounded and unnecessary. Each of these readings highlights the fact that the internet is not as
scary as some would like to think it is!

“The alarm is repetitive: something is happening now to rend apart the supposedly supportive, fulfilling bonds of the olden days—although in every generation the alarmists keep looking back approvingly to the previous generation” (Networked, Ch. 5).

We’re all heard it before. It’s that age-old warning that the latest greatest thing—whatever it may be—will, in fact, be the last greatest thing, because the newfangled contraption will inevitably spell the end of civilization. So, in their book entitled, Networked: The New Social Operating System, Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman take it upon themselves to reassure us that, in fact, technology simply represents ways in we’ve changed the way we interact with one another. “People are not hooked on gadgets,” they argue, “they are hooked on each other” (Networked, Ch. 1). I agree, but that’s not to say that naysayers don’t have a point. Later on in their introductory chapter, the pair give their answer to the question on all of our minds, “So, is all of this technology good or bad?” “The simple answer is: both and more,” they say. “Networked individuals live in an environment that tests their capacities to deal with each other and with information.”

As a “Networked individual,” that happens to be exactly how I view my own interaction with technology—it’s a test. Lately, I’ve started to become more and more interested in Instagram. However, as I’ve become enamored with browsing through the seemingly endless supply of artwork other users have created, and creating some of my own, I’ve found that it’s more challenging to be fully present, if you will, with my friends and loved ones. In fact, it’s even more of a challenge for them at times than it is for me. Before I know it, I can miss the punch line of my friend’s story, or my girlfriend and I might spend thirty minutes of our dinner together browsing through social media. But, that doesn’t make those media bad, it presents us with a challenge. Like the family in the radio interview, some of us set technology aside for the weekend. Others of us simply make smartphones dinner table contraband. Whatever our various strategies might be, the point is to have one. We don’t need to condemn technology. We just need to praise balance.

Reading the story of Peter and Trudy, really enlightened me to the positive effects of social networking and how it brings people together. At first, when I read how Peter had taken pictures of Trudy in the hospital and shared them with people, I was a little put off by that. After I read how he did it to let his family/friends know about her condition, I understood how beneficial it was to getting help with their financial and emotional situations. Through networking, Peter and Trudy were able to get donations and meals and also connect with people that sympathized with their story. This was definitely one of the good stories about the internet.

To read the second study from Rainie and Wellman about how Americans do not have confidants or close relationships with their spouses or neighbors, really made me think. I have very close relationships with my friends and family. I do not think it is right to blame the internet for that because the internet acutally brings people together. Most of the time when people are on their cell phones or the internet, they are communicating with other people.

I have learned a lot about how the roles of internet and technologies play an important role in many people lives. It is a lot easier to send a quick text than to have a conversation with someone. With text messaging you are able to receive a quick response. I have also become a fan of following blogs and that is easiest way to feel connected to someone thousands of miles away.

All of the new technologies are putting a strain on the relationships we have with our family, friends, and romantically. People would rather play Ruzzle with their best friend instead of going out to a movie. I know that for my family we a “no cell phone policy,” whenever we are together whether we are in the car or at the table preparing to eat my mom makes everyone put their phones away.

The overall message I received from the studies is that there are too many text messaging conversations and not enough face-to-face conversations. I found it interesting that “more teens report contacting their friends on a daily basis using texting (54%)” (Ling 2010). Teens come in contact with their friends at school I would think that they are talking about the school day instead of texting. I also found it interesting that “35% of 12 year-olds say they text daily, while 54% of 14 year-olds and 70% of 17 year-olds text everyday” (Lenhart 2010). I can honestly say as we get older those number steadily decrease. I know that I barely talk with my best friend face-to-face and that when we do it seems rushed or pushed, like we might run out of things to say. I agree with the findings and can definitely say that when I was 12-17 years-old I talked with my friends daily over the phone mainly to gossip or complain.

The way the world is shaped today, it is not surprising to find out that people really have becomed wrapped up in so much technology. I admit that I text, email, facebook and other socializing via technology a lot. What I have learned is that most people (like myself) really cannot go a full day without some type of electronic communication. Personally, I have done it before and it was kind of bad because I felt like I had no source of communication. Most relationships with families, friends, etc. sometimes rely on text messages or email which is not a bad thing but it also pushes us away from little things like face to face conversations. The message that received from both of the studies is that regardless of who you are, you are someone in technology communication. Even the most annexed people who claim to not have any friends seem to chat online with people they know or have gotten to know via social networking. The readings with Baym and Raine & wellman helped me realize that yes our society has a major issue with old fashioned communication. I asked my sister what would she do without her cell phone or laptop for a week and she responded “Honestly, I would die.” This worried me because as a kid a lot of us did not have computers or cell phones, therefore we relied on regular home phones and face to face chats with friends and family. Being a networked individual I have become accustomed to keeping up with personal and business individuals on the internet, but it would not be a death warrant if I did not have technology for a few days. People really have to make some changes about consuming their lives with technology because sooner or later the generations to come are not going to know what a regular paper back book is due to computers and tablets taking their places. Internet technology is definitely not a bad thing, it’s how people take advantage of it and do not know how to have just a regular in person conversation.

After I finished reading Baym chapter 6, Rainie & Wellman (2012), Lenhart et al. (2010), and listened to Nancy Baym on WBUR’s Radio Boston, I have learned that the internet and new technologies such as email, IM, Chat, blogs, texting, and mobile devices are evolving very fast to become a very important part in our lives. These new technologies are not affecting our lives and relationships in a bad way; instead, they are adding into it and facilitating it. Therefore, the over all message from these studies is that very soon all these new technologies will be the norm in our society just like the telephone and the television and the other technologies that faced the same criticize when they first come out. Everything new can be under notice and critique from people, but when people take their time and experience it they will get used to it, and then it will become something not unusual.

One expression that I liked from listening to Nancy Baym Radio is when they had the discussion about how people can stop anything they feel not comfortable doing it because they have the choice to do so. For example, if they think that texting too much everyday is taking from their valuable family time, they can stop it and make certain hour everyday for family face-to-face time. After all we should control our devices not the opposite. Additionally, we should find a balance in everything in our lives so we won’t do something that would affect something else in a bad way. Though, unlike what Baym think that it is rare to walk into a room where five people in it not looking to each others in the eye because they are busy looking down at their laptop or IPod or any other devices. In fact, I disagree with Baym on this point because I have seen this lots of time; especially, in school. As soon as I enter any of classroom on campus I found everybody busy texting or checking their emails, etc. Until ten years a go you would go to the classroom chat with your classmates until the professor comes. Today, the semester would finish and you do not know the name of your classmate who is sitting next to you or remember how they look like.

Another thing that I like is in Baym, ch.6 ,P. 141 “ people who had more social ties in their local communities were more likely to use internet in order to meet new people…Belongers belong everywhere.”This is so true because if someone sociable in nature wherever he goes can make new friends whether it is in his or her community or online. Whereas,  if someone is not sociable in nature no matter where he go or what kind of devices or technologies they own they would never use it or try to find new friends. My husband is a good example for this. He has zero friends and all the friends that we have they are mine. After all his brothers put too much pressure on him he created a Facebook account but he never used it and whenever his brothers need something from him they send me a message. He always say that the only reason he carry his cell phone is for emergencies and if he is missing someone it would be nicer to call this person or visit him. Even though I am completely the opposite, and my friends list is getting larger day after day, I do respect his opinion because we are all different and each one of us has the choice to chose what to do in his or her life in the way they feel comfortable about it. The main point is to respect and love the others the way they are and not try change them if you really wanted to have them in your life.

As much as I hate to admit this, my smartphone isn’t even as far as the bedside table at night, its under my pillow. It began in college when I lived away from home for the first time, and drove an unreliable car. However, I didn’t become fully aware that my mobile had literally become an extension of myself until last semester when a reading from Dr.Markman’s course last semester described me as a “cyborg”. Sad, but true. My father grew up in the 50s and 60s in a home with his 8 siblings, parents, grandparents, and aunts. By contrast, I grew up in a home only with my one sibling and parents. This shift is typical of the American communities as Wellman describes in his Wisconsin radio spot, moving from geographically based communities to social networks, and more recently digital networks. I’m very close with my father’s large family, but a good bit of the “work of our relationships” is done online. We Facetime and Skype, text and email constantly. In this way I have ignored the advice of Eric Schmidt from the Baym radio spot, and I actually am living part of my life by the glow of a monitor. And you know what? I’m grateful for it. These technologies have allowed me to have rich and meaningful relationships – remotely. However, I would be lying if I didn’t say that the “technology Sabbath” embraced by one family from the radio spots didn’t sound refreshing to me. What would it be like to be unplugged for a blessed 48 hours? Would the flowers smell sweeter?

I am particularly irritated by the unfounded and overzealous criticisms of CMC so it was refreshing to see this quote in Rainie&Wellman, “Anxieties about the withering of relationships are not new, but began many centuries before the coming of the internet…in past decades, they were tied to industrialization, bureaucratization, urbanization, socialism, and capitalism.” p.117. This reminds us that with every generation and development of new technology, there is something labeled the day’s boogeyman. Quotes like this help us keep things in perspective. Also from this particular article was a reminder that superficial observations of behavior can lead to incorrect assumptions. What at a distance might seem like an addiction to one’s cell phone is actually a manifestation of an extrovert’s online socializing.

The Pew study once again points out the differences that most often fall along gender lines. Not surprisingly, women use calling and texting more often than men and most often for socializing while men use it significantly less and for more utilitarian reasons. And again, safety is brought up as a pro for mobile technology. However, I’ve yet to see any research that shows we are actually safer thanks to our mobile technology, but that doesn’t stop my mild panic attacks when I realize I’ve left my house without my phone.

For those undergrads in the class, you missed a good reading in on Sawchuck and Crow about grandmother’s using technology to connect with their grandchildren long distance. Once again, research contradicts the popular belief that older generations reject technology, here we have an example of the embracing of technology to overcome a hurdle of distance. This is exemplary of the changing dynamics of our society discussed on Wellman’s Wisconsin radio spot which described our society’s change from physically located communities and extended families in the home to digital communities and social networks. I am seeing this very situation play itself out with my mother in law who has asked me to teach her to text and Facetime so that she can interact more frequently with her grandchildren that live in Indiana.

Overall, I think these studies are a good reminder that the changes in our society pre-date our mobile technology. For years we have been morphing into a culture that is more open to moving a long distance from one’s family to pursue work or education, and the mobile technology allows us to maintain relationships across these distances. Of course our relationships and the way we communicate with one another has changed as a result, but the telephone changed relationships in much the same way, and I don’t recall the letter writers of old being up in arms about the changes. It seems to me that often the negative assumptions are, as Baym reminds us, without proof.