The media + communication studies network
Think Tank: A world without Facebook. Possible [and/or] necessary?
Other than negative, a conference with such a theme (if it does eventuate in a university) could without a doubt be a marketing avenue for the SNS.
First, defining the terms and key questions: Papacharissi (once more :) considers human interaction, communication and connection "as part of the virtual geography of SNSs. For him, compared with other SNSs, Facebook emerges as the architectural equivalent of a glasshouse, with a publicly open structure, looser behavioral norms and an abundance of tools that members use to leave cues for each other… The same tools may be used to project more carefully crafted presentations of the self and to posit performances of taste that lead to sociocultural allegiances or differentiations" (2009: 199).
A. Possible =
1. Capable of happening, existing, or being true without contradicting proven facts, laws, or circumstances.
2. Capable of occurring or being done without offense to character, nature, or custom.
3. Capable of favorable development; potential
B. Necessary =
1. Absolutely essential, indispensable.
2. Needed to achieve a certain result or effect; requisite: the necessary tools.
3. a. Unavoidably determined by prior conditions or circumstances; inevitable: the necessary results of overindulgence.b. Logically inevitable.
4. Required by obligation, compulsion, or convention
Acknowledging these definitions and Facebook's 500 million members, we can ask:
- Is a world without facebook still possible?
- What would the world be without it?
- Is facebook something useful or necessary?
Papacharissi, Zizi (2009). ‘The virtual geographies of social networks: a comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn and ASmallWorld’. New Media & Society. Vol 11’(1&2), pp.199–220.
Tags: facebook, facebookless, tank, think, world
Views: 55
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by František (Francesco) Kalvas on -
FaceBook is no way necessary, despite all the million of members. Because it has no necessary functions the other SNSs do not have.
FaceBook is interesting for users and advertisers, but it is not necessary - you could advertise at other sites and you could use other SNSs (Twitter, MySpace, Hi5 etc.) There are many "national FaceBooks", as well - some of them could be easily colinized by hypothetically-abandoned-FB-users.
World without the FaceBook? The same... definitely. Some users (and advertisers) would colonize other SNS, others just wait and something similar to FaceBook would emerge very soon. And the past-FB-users would start to use it. I am 100% convinced it is only one posible scenario.
I think that questions such a "world without FB" make no sense, because FB is not only one SNS. It would be more reasonable ask "world without SNS", but it makes no sense, as well. It is imposible! How would You "destroy" FB and other SNSs? Ban by a law? No way... Break-down if infrastructure and other apocaliptic visions? We would have more important questions than absence of FaceBook...
I am sorry for my tone, but I just think this style of questions to be scholastic (angels on the needle) and unrealistic. It is impossible to ask about "world without FB" because FB is there and it is unreal to break-down, be banned etc.Now you just can ask about "world before FB", cos I hope, you still could find countries and communities without contact with FB, respectively SNS. So, do an research!
But "world without SNS"? Read a Popper's Historicism - it is imposible to predict the future reasons and conditions of such a "being-without-SNS", but these reasons and conditions are crucial for answers.
Please, just imagine yourself being in 1962 but knowing nothing about future (especially internet and SNS). And then try to aks yourself "What would the world be without TV?" What would you said in 1962? Could you imagine the TV decline when TV emerges?
To sum up:
1) such a mind-experiments like "is the world possible without FB" makes no sense - world was possible without human beings (at least few days after creation), so why it shouldn't be possible without their technology
2) such a mind-experiments like "world withouth FB" makes no sense, as well - we can't imagine reasons for and condotions od living withouth FB; but these reasons and conditions are crucial for such a answer.
3) it is better to ask how is SNS (not only FB!) shaped the "old world" and how SNS function now.
4) the last question is good for survey, but not for academic debate - it is obvious the answer depends on answeree. -
-
Permalink Reply by Norman Pena on -
Very good response, I believe. A real think tank! Thank you František (Francesco).
-
-
Permalink Reply by Gina M. Chen on -
I think Frantisek raises some really good points. The question may not be is a world without Facebook possible, because, of course it is, it occurred for millions of years. To me the more interesting question is what role has Facebook taken our lives and how does that add to or subtract from other experiences? How does it effect the way we interact for better and worse? How can we harness it's possibilities?
I am always a little leery of the idea that somehow technology has ruined us. People have worried about technology undoing society since any technology was invented. My guess is cave people balked when someone invented the wheel, thinking it would ruin our youth and corrupt our morals. For decades researchers tried to find out how TV would ruin us, mainly to no avail.
I think the truth is that we must move forward, and part of that is technology. The skill and art is learning how to use it, rather than be used by it.
Thanks for starting a good exchange of ideas, Norman! -
-
Permalink Reply by Norman Pena on
-
Your thoughts reminded me of the work of the cognitive psychologists Cheryl Coyle (Rutgers University) and Heather Vaughn (Columbia University). More than part of technology and revolution, social networking for them is a communication evolution:
"A social network is a configuration of people connected to one another through interpersonal means, such as friendship, common interests, or ideas. “Social networking” was not created in the age of the Internet; it existed long before. Social networks exist because humans are societal and require relationships with other humans in order to survive. This need to bond emotionally with others was documented as far back as 1958." (13)
Social Networking: Communication Revolution or Evolution? Bell Labs Technical Journal 13(2), 13–18 (2008) © 2008 Alcatel-Lucent. (Oops sorry, Elena, the journal is actually not one of SAGE's this time).
The article actually encouraged me to include the word STILL in the question - "is a world...still possible?", firmly believing like you and František that it is! -
-
Permalink Reply by František (Francesco) Kalvas on
-
Great citation, Norman! I think it is obvious we have two questions with their own answers:
a) Q: Is a world still possible without SNS?
A: yes, definitely it is.
b) Q: Is the world IN PRESENT SHAPE still possible without SNS?
A: no, definitely not.
So, the world is possible without SNS, BUT not in the present shape. Why?
The essence of society is the social networking. According Coyle and Vaughn, the social networking is human need, so we can not stop it by stopping SNS. We force change of networking environment by stopping SNS. The change of networking environment changes the shape of the societal essence and society, as well. The change of society changes the shape of the world. So, the change of networking environment MUST change recent shape of the world. -
-
Permalink Reply by Gina M. Chen on
-
Few things. First, Norman, thanks for sharing that cite. I agree. social networking isn't new. Quite frankly, people have been doing it since time began. (From an evolutionary psychology standpoint, we are all here today because our cave people ancestors knew how to social network to gather and hunt and protect themselves from predators. If they hadn't, they would have died before they had a chance to pass their genes onto us.)
I think online social networks are just the latest (an inevitable) iteration of a basic human need to affiliate or form connections with other people. (See writings by H.A. Murray and Abraham Maslow on these needs. Also, see seminal article by Baumeister and Leary (1995, The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529).
I believe that what happens through social media is just the type communication that has always happened. between people. We're herding animals, basically. Most of us do better in groups. -
-
Permalink Reply by František (Francesco) Kalvas on
-
Excellent! Thank you, Gina.
-
© 2013 Created by SAGE Publications.
