Self-Construction Through Social Media
Self-Construction through Social Media
Social media is often seen as basically an extension of the personal social sphere into the online environment. In Why Youth Heart Social Networks, Boyd (2007) presents social media spaces as essentially versions of what youth are doing in their offline lives. MySpace pages are presentations of the self and convey social status, much like the things people do to improve their personal appearance offline. The content is presented as essentially analogous to offline social interactions. The only difference that Boyd suggests is that teenagers use these spaces to avoid the controls places on teenagers by society and distance constraints.
However, I want to present that the technology of social media is actually a space that creates an identity for the user in a way that doesn’t exist in normal social situations. In an offline social situation, social exchanges are similar to what Ong says about speech, instantly disappearing. There is no record of what we talk about and the identity we present to other people. However, identity as constructed online is a thing that exists outside of the moment. Individuals manage their identities, adjust them and refine them, much like an author changes a piece of writing. Identity is not process or an act but a thing online.
The key affect of this is how we create our identity. We don’t really have access to our identities through introspection. Our identity is a creation based on our interactions with the world and the internalization of those interactions. In normal social interaction, verbal comments about how a person is smart, pretty, strong, funny and what-not are internalized by the person to become what the person thinks of him or herself as. However, the online environment allows the creator of a profile to craft a version of him or herself the way he or she wants to be viewed, then internalize that presentation. In that way, self is constructed externally then internalized.
This is particularly true for a process of identity construction called Ludic self-construction (Deumert, 2014). Ludic self-construction creates a self that focuses on a few main qualities and closes particular interpretations of the person off for others. This might mean cultivating their behavior into certain subculture or group. However in Ludic self-construction, it remains open to the person to change or cultivate the narrative in a new direction. Playfulness is key because it opens up the options and reduces the possibility of closure. In contrast, narrative self-construction focuses on past events and closing off identity (de Mul, 2005). People possessing narrative identities hold that people do not change and the self is a permanent thing.
Social Media spaces are textual spaces that allows a person to create a purely self-constructed (or Ludic) identity. A person is not usually bound by their past in an online space. They can construct a purely fictitious self. Take for example how sometimes people will present themselves in a wildly different way in a social media space than offline. A person who may be shy in the office might be the top poster online. Likewise, gender bending is also not that uncommon, especially in the social spaces of video games (Tronstad, 2008). Overtime, a person can refine and play with different kinds of identities until he or she or ze comes to ideal way of constructing their identity.
The technology of social media, by being a permanent, changeable and public representation of a person, presents an ideal for Ludic self-construction.
Sources:
Boyd, Danah. (2007) “Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life.” MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
de Mul, Jos. (2005) “The game of life. Narrative and ludic identity formation in computer games.” In: J. Goldstein and J. Raessens,Handbook of Computer Games Studies. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 251-266
Deumert, Ana. (2014) “The performance of the ludic self on Social Networking Sites.” In: P. Seargeant and C. Tagg, Language of Social Media: Identity and Community on the Internet. London, Macmillan
Tronstad, Ragnhild. (2008) “Character Identification in World of Warcraft: The relationship between capacity and appearance.” In: H. Corneliussen and J. Rettberg. Digital Culture, Play and Identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.C
Image:
Cat and fish on computer. Retrieved from http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20130209_LDD002_0.jpg
Some nice points, Bryan.
I personally have a rather cynical view of the images we present on social media and don’t necessarily view it as an extension of the personal social sphere into the online environment. As Boyd stated, Social network sites have complicated our lives because they have made this rapid shift in public life very visible (Boyd, 2007). I think when we are adding these profiles we are constructing a version of us that is permanent. And it is no wonder humans formulate profiles because as Friesen noted, gregarious behaviour can be rewarded on sites Facebook, seeing others’ approval of a resource will draw ever more attention to it (Friesen, 2012).
Unlike offline social situations, social exchanges are similar to what Ong says about speech, instantly disappearing. I know this affects much of what we submit electronically whether is it on Facebook, Instagram or our weekly discussion forums. Before I post, I scrupulously examine all other comments, and the articles to ensure I don’t sound like an idiot (either repeating another comment, or missing the point of an article entirely). Again, I think when Friesen mentions that these technologies will introduce radically new ‘versions’ of learning and education, that we should stop and also include ourselves.
References:
Boyd, Danah. (2007) “Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life.” MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Friesan, N & Lowe, S. (2012). The questionable promise of social media for education: connective learning and the commercial imperative. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00426.x/epdf
Hello Bryan,
I like your points around the differences between the creation of an online and an offline identity. I agree that an online identity is more permanent. The items we post to social media can be dig up in the future, unlike sentences spoken during offline social interactions. To your point about self-constructed identity, I wonder how much thought the young users of social media put into the creation of their identity. How much conscious control do they have over their online self. As Boyd (2007) points out,
“[K]ey information about a person’s body is often present online, even when that person is trying to act deceptively; for example, people are relatively good at detecting when someone is a man even when they profess to be a woman online.” (p.12)
As someone who arrived at my identity using the “traditional” methods of the offline world, I have difficulty fully understanding how those raised immersed in social media create identity. I have noticed however that my students move quicker in posting and sharing information than I do. When I post to a social media site I pour over my words. When a picture is posted I ensure I am maintaining a level of professionalism. The students I work with, will post pictures and comments almost instantly. Their world of social media does not seem as distinct from the offline world as it does to me. I wonder if the students are creating an identity that blends offline and online in such a way that to them there is no difference.
We all try to affect how we are perceived be it online or offline, I wonder however how different the students of today view their online and offline identity.
Boyd, Danah. (2007) “Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life.” MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
That’s a really interesting point. I would suggest that students are less aware of their wider audience in social media. They post images to help construct their identity based on the perception of their friends. However, they do not think about the wider audience of potential bosses, parents, teacher, friend’s parents, etc. This is because they have a limited ability to take perspectives. As such, they are trying to create an identity based on a narrow audience.
The relationship between online and offline might work like you suggested in multiple ways. The online self could present itself as a continuation of the offline. Facebook is pretty good for that I find in my own life. It can also create a break. I once tried out gender-bending in World of Warcraft. I quickly recognized how different genders are treated in video games by that experience. By taking on an new identity, you can really experience a whole set of new experiences. It just depends on how them medium is used.
Hi Bryan,
I enjoyed reading your thoughts on identity construction. Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites resonated with me as well – and I agree with Haneefa that not only Youth (Heart) Social Media! Constructing online identities that will live longer than we will seems to fill a need to create our legacies, be remembered in ways we wish to be remembered and somehow live on ‘eternally’.
I was particularly struck by the article’s explanations behind the ‘conviviality’ of sites like Facebook, being driven by business interests, thereby explaining the lack of ‘dis-like’ buttons and similar features. People are now constructing their own ‘brands’ in the way that companies do using many of the same tools. Some say there is an artifice of positivity, which seems to explain, as many studies claim, how social media make people feel depressed and not the other way around.
“Cat-fish[kat-fish] noun – a person who pretends to be someone they’re not, using social media to create a false identity, particularly to pursue deceitful online romances.”
Your featured image caught my attention right away as it reminded me of the documentary film Catfish in which young filmmaker Nev Schulman allowed himself to be seduced by a woman who created a fictional Facebook universe and social network of invented online identities. The film itself led to rumours that it was all a hoax, as layers of deceitful social identity and motives emerged. The film captures the essence of the discussion.
It is no wonder that Schulman has run with the whole concept, turning Catfish into a television show and a book, “In Real Life: Love, Lies and Identity in the Digital Age.” I don’t know if the term “catfish” was coined by Schulman or if it was already in use and he popularized it further. I do believe Schulman’s tag line for his book is perfect:
“On the Internet, You Can Be Anyone… What If You Want to Be Yourself?”
Thanks!
Julia
References
Catfish (film). (n.d.). Accessed August 3, 2015 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catfish_%28film%29
O’Hehir, A. (2010). Untangling the “Catfish” hoax rumors. Salon. Accessed August 3, 2015 from http://www.salon.com/2010/10/14/catfish/
Schulman, Nev. (n.d.). Nev Schulman Website. Accessed August 3, 2015 from http://www.nevschulman.com/
Thanks for posting this, Bryan! Ludic self-construction is a new concept to me but this process of identity construction is all happening around us. As human beings, we are social animals and we need to be connected to others in one way or another and our social faculties determine that we do care about how we are perceived by others. Like Matthew, I also examine other people’s comments and articles before posting to ensure my posts and ideas synchronize with others! Indeed, “Our identity is a creation based on our interactions with the world and the internalization of those interactions” like you said; there are lots of factors that affect perception of our real-life identity, including our appearance, race, education and social status, etc. However, digital technology of social networks allows all these “features” of us to be “crafted” or presented in selected ways and forms. Blogger Lauren Fisher’s remark “it is much less about identity through ourselves, and more about the self through others” reflects much of the reality in the 21st century. We can customize how we are being perceived, by presenting what we want our identities to be associated with. Social networks are useful tools for self-representation and identity-cultivation; we can create multiple identities and at the same time no identity at all by hiding behind anonymity. Disqus analyzed the data of commenters within their system and found that the majority (65%) was using pseudonyms, followed by anonymous commenters (35%) and real identity way behind (4%). These numbers are very telling. People often associate this phenomenon to be negative. But isn’t identity fragile to begin with? Regardless how much it resembles the true self, it is merely a creation of truth. Like Bryan said, taking on new identities allows us to experience a whole set of new experiences. It’s much more important to equip the next generations with the necessary skillsets and knowledge to be informed and responsible online users.
Reference:
Fisher, L. (2012, January) “Why social media is leading to a new era of identity.” Simplyzesty. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.simplyzesty.com/blog/article/january-2012/why-social-media-is-leading-to-a-new-era-of-identity