Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

What Adults Should Know About Kids' Online Networking

By Kate Sheppard, WireTap. Posted January 24, 2007.


Think you've read everything about Myspace? Think again. Social network expert danah boyd breaks it down.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Kate Sheppard

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Social researcher danah boyd (who generally chooses not to capitalize her name) has made a name for herself as an expert on young people and online social networks. A Ph.D. candidate at the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley and a graduate fellow at the University of Southern California Annenberg Center, boyd has also worked as a social media researcher at Yahoo, Google, and Tribe.net. Recently, she appeared on The O'Reilly Factor, where she enlightened Bill about Myspace and the "dopey kids" it attracts. At 29, boyd has become the go-to woman for "adults" trying to figure out what "kids" do online all day, and one look at her blog, Apophenia, offers insight into her exhausting speaking/interview schedule.

We caught up with boyd recently to talk about social networks, kids these days, and the intersection of technology and political organizing.

Kate Sheppard: How did you start researching "digital publics"?

danah boyd: I first went online when I was about 14. My brother was a hardcore geek and I thought what he was doing was really lame, and I wanted nothing to do with it. Then I realized there were people in there, and it wasn't just about coding. And I started talking to people online and participating in all sorts of social interaction, and found it fascinating. So when I went to college, I decided I was going to study computer science, in part based on those experiences.

Needless to say, computer science degrees are not meant to engage with the web in any socially relevant way. So I ended up getting involved with a lot of computer graphics, which was awesome. When I entered college, I started blogging, so I was also having this whole web experience.

My research has gotten more and more related to youth over the years [and to] identity, and performance in online environments, which in many ways are online public environments.

KS: What sort of relationships are young people forming online? Who are they connecting with?

db: Most of what's happening is they're building relationships, they're engaging socially, they're seeking validation, they're seeking negotiation of status, and this is happening both on and offline in a very fluid way. My generation was much more about "going online" and it being this separate universe, in many ways a totally separate social world with social rules and scripts and what not. But for a lot of young people, it is a fluid environment that moves between their offline and online worlds. The technology doesn't act as a separator.

And what you end up having is two different clusters of kids. You have kids who are getting all they need in terms of validation and status, and everything else from school, peers in the physical world, peers from church, summer camp, activities, school, those kinds of obvious physical environments. They are just replicating their networks and their community online, using all the online tools -- IM, email, blogs, Myspace, that kind of thing -- to talk to the people that they already have networks formulated around.

You still also have the marginalized and ostracized kids who are actually actively seeking out a community of peers online because they don't have one offline. This is who I was growing up. The assumption from the earlier days of the Internet was that this latter [behavior] is all that the kids were doing, and actually that's become the less common practice.

KS: What are some the differences between online and offline networks?

db: There are sort of four properties and one key practice that are fundamentally different online. The key practice is that you have to write yourself into being. To a certain degree we do this offline as well, whereby you have a body that you're working with that you then accessorize to hell. Online you don't have a body, you don't have a presence, you don't have anything that sort of marks your existence.

There are four functions that are sort of the key architecture of online publics and key structures of mediated environments that are generally not part of the offline world. And those are persistence, searchability, replicability, and invisible audiences. Persistence -- what you say sticks around. Searchability -- my mother would have loved the ability to sort of magically scream into the ether to figure out where I was when I'd gone off to hang out with my friends. She couldn?t, thank God. But today when kids are hanging out online because they've written [themselves] into being online, they become very searchable. Replicability -- you have a conversation with your friends, and this can be copied and pasted into your Live Journal and you get into a tiff. That creates an amazing amount of "uh ohs" when you add it to persistence. And finally, invisible audiences. In unmediated environment, you can look around and have an understanding of who can possibly overhear you. You adjust what you're saying to the reactions of those people. You figure out what is appropriate to say, you understand the social context. But when we're dealing with mediated environments, we have no way of gauging who might hear or see us, not only because we can't tell whose presence is lurking at the moment, but because of persistence and searchability.

KS: How does online or digital identity differ from one's day-to-day life presentation?

db: It's a performance, right? In that performance there are things that are magnified. Think of it this way. My favorite thing about online dating is that 80 percent of women are above average looking, according to their marker, and 80 percent of men make above average in salary. Is this true? Of course not. But our self-perceptions are often very distorted. We want to be seen in the best light. This is why we sit home with a shitload of makeup and try to construct a "Don?t we look suave" sort of appearance. The same thing happens online, but instead of using expensive paints for our faces, we're using digital ones. But we're still trying to put what we think is our best foot forward for the social context at hand.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: networking, myspace

Kate Sheppard spent three years as an editor for Buzzsaw Haircut, Ithaca College's award-winning student magazine. She is now an editorial intern at Grist Magazine in Seattle, a contributor for WireTap, and a freelance writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
more inane youth worship...
Posted by: xenacat on Jan 24, 2007 5:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great, just what we need - a barely articulate 29 year old doctoral candidate talking about what teenagers do on line. I, for one, advocate getting one's adult butt online and checking it out personally. That is the best way to see what your precious teen is up to. Do I actually think that online communities are much more than sophisticated phones for these kids or that there is anything lasting about the communities they form? No. Teens are just kids and culturally we are obscenely fascinated with that phase of youth - much to their detriment. Knock off the voyuerism and monitor the kids' behavior for their own good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: more inane youth worship... Posted by: Entheogenic
» RE: more inane youth worship... Posted by: mindcryme
Youth and social networking
Posted by: kidvidkid on Jan 24, 2007 6:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
boyd says, "My favorite thing about online dating is that 80 percent of women are above average looking, according to their marker, and 80 percent of men make above average in salary. Is this true? Of course not."

"Average looking" seems a meaningless concept, not quantifiable but a melange of societal norms and biases mixed with self-image.

"Average salary," however, is a measurable number and it's altogether possible that 80% of men using online dating sites are above the national average, assuming they market themselves toward professionals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Youth and social networking Posted by: MartianBachelor
makes sense
Posted by: tmercadal on Jan 24, 2007 6:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Sheppard's interview of Ms. boyd makes sense to me. I teach different levels of undergrads, from freshmen to seniors, and I had already perceived these dynamics from their comments inside and outside the classroom. Young people will usually be at the cutting edge of technology as pertains to social life, especially when technology (phone, internet) offers them the possibility of socializing without having to do it face-to-face. Ms. boyd's work is useful in that she is not only keeping track of it, but gleaning structures and theoretical knowledge from it. While this might be helpful to parents and communication scholars, it will also be helpful, unfortunately, to marketers targeting the kids as consumers.

TMS

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: makes sense Posted by: DaBear
» RE: makes sense Posted by: Iconoclast421
kb
Posted by: kb on Jan 24, 2007 7:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is basic Sociology, lifted from the title of Irving Goffman's book, "The Presentation of Self In Everyday Life"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh thanks! This is fantastic.
Posted by: Lauren on Jan 24, 2007 8:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Despite the negitivity troll. I like an inside view all neatly summed up like this. It is quite useful for politics and education. It that the beef? Trolls want us ignorant? If you don't like it, why not just be quiet? Thank you.

"db: Myth No. 1 is that everybody is on there to meet people, and everyone is on there to engage in social networking. That's one of the reasons that I call them "social network" sites instead of "social networking" sites." I thought this was very useful information. "The idea of social networking, going to meet tons of strangers, is typically a much more common practice among adult users of these sites." And this bit even more useful.

"Myth No. 2 is that kids are in grave danger just because of participation. The risky behavior is not putting information about yourself online, which is what most adults think. We do not have a single case related to Myspace where someone has been abducted. We've had plenty of press coverage of these things, and every single one of them has proven to not be an abduction, but a runaway situation, or the kid was abducted by their noncustodial parent." Wow, thanks db!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Title is Misleading...
Posted by: WyrdSister on Jan 24, 2007 12:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I work in an alternative high school and I was very interested in this article when seeing the title. I was sorely disappointed.

This article gives parents absolutley no useful information and from what IS there, gives a false sense of safty when it comes the their children, the internet and sites like MySpace.

From a parent point of view, the information given in the article is dangerous. To suggest that there have not been crimes committed against minors by adults using online network sites is irresponsible, and frankly I would like to see hard data to back up her claims as I just do not believe them. There are way too many degenerate adults who use this medium in a preditory manor to make such statements. There may not have been any outright abductions, yet, because each is in their respective homes/work/school. These children do not "just run away", they are persuaded and lured; sometimes over a long period of time. This, to me, is abduction. Teenagers are not adults and should not be thought of as them; their brains are not done developing. That is not to say that some are not mature and have common sense, but not to the level of an adult, especially a deviant adult. My son is 17 soon to be 18 and I check his MySpace page and his e-mail on a regular basis to make sure that he is safe even though he has a good head on his shoulders. We have had countless conversations about online safty and how that relates to offline safty because sometimes teenages do not make good decisions.

From an educators point of view, I have to disagree with the statement made regarding posting personal information not being dangerous. Just because they are not conversing with someone does not mean that they are not lurking. I have seen some of the things that teenagers post on their pages: the half naked pictures; the language used in regards to sex and drugs; and it is no wonder pedos lurk. Don't get me wrong...I am not trying to be an alarmist, but just practical because I am with teenagers all day, every day. We have a strict policy that sites like these not to be accessed from school as there is a liability if one of our students get hurt as a result. This is not about being reactionary, it is about trying to keep my students safe.

As responsible adults, it is our job to protect and guide, and I will continue to do so, even if Ms. boyd seems to think that online danger is a myth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Title is Misleading... Posted by: DaBear
» you check his email?? Posted by: Iconoclast421
I'm confused, though....
Posted by: DaBear on Jan 24, 2007 1:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Myth No. 2 is that kids are in grave danger just because of participation. The risky behavior is not putting information about yourself online, which is what most adults think. We do not have a single case related to Myspace where someone has been abducted. We've had plenty of press coverage of these things, and every single one of them has proven to not be an abduction, but a runaway situation, or the kid was abducted by their noncustodial parent.

I get the abduction thing but wasn't there some event in CT last year where the MSM was all over an alleged rape of a 13 year old, "located" and "lured" via her myspace account? Usually when I hear this sort of tale, especially when it's on MSM, I tune out becuase 9 out of 10 times it's comlete b.s. But I'd like to know the facts on that... *sigh* more reading to do tonight I guess to find out. I'm guessing the truth is somewhere south of the hype.... but I wish it was in the interview (which was way too short).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'm confused, though.... Posted by: Entheogenic
» RE: I'm confused, though.... Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: I'm confused, though.... Posted by: Entheogenic
This woman is an idiot and typical talking head
Posted by: Bobsays on Jan 24, 2007 2:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'Never has so much mumbo jumbo been passed off as deep knowledge.' And that was how a man once summed up EST in the 1970s. And techno wizards like this woman are our modern equivalent. They tell us nothing insightful about youth, their motivations or how they behave. The web is not a mystery cave impenetrable to outsiders. Youth are motivated by the same things they always have been: they are horny, insecure, curious, want to be taken seriously and under a lot pressure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Contribution to sub-literacy?
Posted by: jdylarid on Jan 25, 2007 12:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gosh, I guess using proper capitalization is just so old school.

One thing undiscussed is the contribution of online networking, "texting" etc. to the ever-growing sub-literacy of children and young adults (and very soon, adults) in this country.

U noe, lerning 2 rite like this, lol
; )

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]