Social Media & New Media Final Exam

How did traditional communication occur?

How did traditional communication occur?

Among people and between people and organizations

Extensive Media Landscape

Internet: New (Digital) Media + Web 2.0: Social Media

Media Landscape

Traditional/old (e.g., newspaper, magazine, TV, radio) + ‘new’ (digital) and social media (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.)

Examples of Traditional/Old Media

Newspaper, magazine, TV, and radio

Examples of ‘New’ (Digital) and Social Media

Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.

Significance of Digitalization

Digital culture offers new opportunities and sets new requirements for how we communicate

Nomophobia

Abnormal dependency of your smartphone and an excessive fear of not being continuously reachable via mobile phone

The Two Media Characteristics

Social Presence & Media Richness

Social Presence (Media Characteristic)

Mediation & Immediacy (space and time of communication)

Media Richness (Media Characteristic)

Amount of information

Social Characteristic

Self-Presentation

Self-Presentation (Social Characteristic)

Extent and forms of self-disclosure

An example of high self-disclosure + low media richness

Blogs

An example of high self-disclosure + medium media richness

Social networking sites (e.g., Facebook)

An example of high self-disclosure + high media richness

Virtual social worlds (e.g., Second Life)

An example of low self-disclosure + low media richness

Collaborative projects (e.g., Wikipedia)

An example of low self-disclosure + medium media richness

Content communities (e.g., YouTube)

An example of low self-disclosure + high media richness

Virtual game worlds (e.g., World of Warcraft)

Describe a Telephone Conversation using Social & Media Characteristics

• Mediation: (Telephone technology) Medium-high

• Immediacy: High

• Media Richness: Use of tone, volume, word choice

• Missing: Gestures, facial expressions, and body posture

Medium Factors (Herring, 2007)

• Synchronicity

• Message Transmission

• Persistence of the Transcript

• Size of message channels of communication

Synchronicity (Medium Factor)

• Asynchronous (different time of producing & receiving)

• Synchronous (e.g., Zooms and Lives)

Message Transmission (Medium Factor)

• One-to-one (phone call)

• One-to-many (Twitter)

• Many-to-many (group zoom call)

Persistence of the Transcript (Medium Factor)

• Ephemeral (temporal messages, e.g., Snapchat)

• Archived (permanent posts)

Size of Message Channels of Communication (Medium Factor)

Amount of text converted, words, images, and sound

Extended Self (Belk, 1988)

Viewing external objects that we own as part of ourselves (material goods become a part of our identity)

Why do our possessions become personalized?

They act as memory markers: souvenirs, photos, and gifts

We use them as cues to show others who we are/want to be

5 Ways to Extend Self in a Digital World

1. Dematerialization

2. Re-embodiment

3. Sharing (of private life & possessions)

4. Co-construction of Self

5. Distributed Memory

Dematerialization

• Converting to intangible and immaterial possessions (e.g., ‘Cloud‘)

• New ‘virtual’ possessions

• Sharing once-private possessions and interests digitally

Re-Embodiment

• Presenting ourselves differently (more ‘attractive’) through online self-presentation (with avatars, Bitmojis, and edited photos/videos)

• Experiment with different or multiple identities

Sharing (of Private Life & Possessions)

• Oversharing due to disinhibition (inhibitions are lower/eliminated online)

• Toxic Disinhibition: Trolling and flaming

• Determining something as ‘ours’ creates a sense of belonging to a group

• Shared sense of space (third places like multiplayer online games)

Co-Construction of Self

• Self-image is increasingly shaped by our interactions with others

• Seek affirmation in social media

Distributed Memory

• Online saving and archiving of memories

• Memory is shared with others: collective memory

• Digital clutter

• Digital immortality/legacy (an immortal virtual self)

FOMO: Fear of Missing Out

• Fear of missing an interesting/fun social event

• A danger of technology as an extension of our social lives: Constantly wanting to know what others are doing

• A consequence of predominantly positive updates on social media: We are always confronted with what we DO NOT have and where we ARE NOT present

• Causes: Relentlessness, dissatisfaction, and regret

Socialbesity

• If you cannot live without your smartphone, because you want to monitor social media at all times

• Common effects: others comment on your excessive mobile phone use (addiction?) and you may get annoyed or angry

2 Kinds of Self-Presentation (Hogan, 2010)

1. Performance: By actors (synchronous situations)

2. Artefacts: Result of performances by actors (asynchronous exhibitions) → Social Media?

Goffman’s Dramaturgical Approach (1959)

‘Life as a stage’

‘Performances’:

• Demarcated setting

• For a specific audience

• Playing a specific role

• Idealized instead of authentic

Front Stage vs. Back Stage

• ‘Putting on a front’

• ‘Conflict’: When fronts collide/when different versions of yourself collide

Goffman’s Approach to Social Media + Critique

Goffman’s Approach: Facebook is a backstage = private messages just to friends

Critique: BUT private DOES NOT = backstage!

Facebook is a specific front stage for online content as performances

• Audience is not clear

• Can be watched at different a different time and when cyber performers are NOT present

Hogan’s Exhibitional Approach: ‘Reproducible Artefacts’

Data

Hogan’s Exhibitional Approach: ‘Storehouses’

Databases

Hogan’s Exhibitional Approach: ‘Curators’

• Their role: Filter, order, and search

• Like algorithms on social media that decide which posts to show to a certain audience

True or False: Hogan’s Exhibitional Approach is always applicable.

False: It is not applicable to all social media like Wikis, online games, WhatsApp, etc.

Difference between Exhibition Sites/Spaces and Offline Performances

Exhibition sites/spaces are:

• Asynchronous

• Limited control over audience

• Broader definitions of ‘friends’

  • Collapsed context

  • Lowest common denominator

Hogan’s Exhibitional Approach: ‘Filter Bubble’

Digital content is curated for the user

Collapsed Context

Overlapping social circles of (family members, coworkers, actual friends, neighbors, acquaintances, etc.) in one space

Lowest Common Denominator

Audience member(s) you would make yourself most aware of when presenting yourself online (i.e., inappropriate post for a boss or grandparent to see)

Social Media

Communication through a network of participants where anyone can publish or share on these platforms

• Internet-based sites and services that promote social interaction between participants

• Delivers content via a network of participants where it can be published by anyone and still distributed across potentially large-scale audiences

• Examples: Discussion forums, blogs, wikis, podcasts, social network sites, conent0sharing sites, apps, and virtual worlds

Mass Media

• Presented as a one-to-many broadcasting mechanism

• Examples: TV, radio, newspaper

Why is the historical/chronological context of the development of social media important?

It suggests the increasingly multinational nature of those interactions

Difference between Web 1.0 and 2.0?

2.0 reflected an apparent shift towards web users as creators (rather than just consumers) of content

What affordances does the online environment allow for self-presentation?

Asynchronicity & Anonymity

“I can show my best qualities online”

Less clear self-concept + high social anxiety

“I enjoy acting out different identities online”

Less clear self-concept + lower self-esteem + less self-monitoring

“I feel my personality online is the real me”

Clearer self-concept + more self-monitoring

“I prefer being online than offline”

Low self-esteem + high social anxiety + low self-monitoring

Permanence (Affordance of Social Media)

• Prolonged accessibility

• Easy to locate (high visibility)

• Elevated interactivity (high social interactivity)

Self-Concept

The collection of beliefs and attitudes of an individual about themself. While some aspects are stable, it remains malleable

What do the affordances of social media facilitate?

Scanning and internalizing of presented behaviours. (Due to the interactive process between the self-concept and the self-presentation)

The 2 Rival Theories (Choi et al., 2020)

Public Commitment Theory and Self-Symbolizing Theory

Public Commitment Theory

• Once individuals make a commitment, they feel pressured to be consistent with it.

• Permanent self-presentation = stronger public commitment

• Greater accessibility = perceived larger audience

Self-Symbolizing Theory

• Striving to acquire symbols of a desired self-concept and wanting them to be noticed by an audience

• Audience = passive witness

• Self-constructed self-presentation rather than a strategic self-presentation

How is self-change driven?

By commitment to self-concept attainment with little consideration for the audience

Choi et al.’s conclusion on “Ephemerality”

Little concern for self-presentation and more authenticity

Function of Algorithm

Sorts through online data to show users the content they are most likely to engage with

How does TikTok algorithm work?

1. Time spent per video

2. User interactions (likes, comments, etc.)

3. Creator quality

The Networked Self

Self is performed through displays of social connection

Props = text, photo, video, etc.

The Algorithmized Self

Engaging with one’s previous self-representations rather than one’s social connections. Self-making practices are sold and rendered into consumer profiles. These categories are then projected back onto the user → “algorithmic identity”.

What is the Agency of the Algorithmized Self?

Low

Users have NO role

The infrastructure is not merely a stage or a tool

What is the Agency of the Networked Self?

High

Advantages of an Algorithm

• Users have agency over the algorithm

• The algorithm ‘understands’ me”

Disadvantages of an Algorithm

• Too much of the same

• Over-fitted

• Feels weird

• Echo chamber leads to confirmation bias

Social Currency

Trends, memes, current events, cultural knowledge. The media content itself has a stronger role in self-making than social and networking processes (less about the user, and more about the content than the creator)

Twitter vs. TikTok

Twitter:

• Self-identification via content relevant for identity

• Interactions such as liking, retweeting, blogging

• Direct messaging used for sharing content

Compared to TikTok:

• Twitter feed is mostly determined by who you are following

YouTube & Instagram vs. TikTok

YouTube & Instagram:

• Content is prioritized

• Strong role of an algorithm

Comapred to TikTok

• In content communities, social aspects require following others

• Includes discussion of content via comments

Facebook vs. TikTok

Facebook:

• Possible to see the activities of others in your network

• Can engage with others via messages, comments, and duets

Compared to TikTok:

• Interactions are rarely used for intended purpose

Selective Self-Presentation: Why is it important?

Present yourself favourably because: It increases your chances of a match/date

Acceptable Misrepresentation Factors

• Asynchronicity

• Reduced cues

• Shared contextual expectations

Online profile as a PROMISE

Asynchronicity

Time to create ideal or possible future self (i.e., quit smoking)

Reduced Cues

Foggy mirror (i.e., a once-body builder has fallen out of shape, but still puts ‘athletic’ in their profile)

Shared Contextual Expectations

Context of dating sites/apps (i.e., ‘everyone looks different in person than online)

13 Motives for using Dating Apps

1. Entertainment/pass time

2. Curiosity

3. Socializing

4. Love

5. Ego boosting

6. Distraction

7. Flirting

8. Peer pressure

9. Travelling

10. Casual sex

11. Forgetting ex

12. Belongingness

13. LGBTQ+

The Five Factor Model (FFM)/Big 5 Personality Traits

1. Openness to experience

2. Conscientiousness

3. Extraversion

4. Agreeableness

5. Neuroticism (opposite of emotionally stable)

Results of Timmermans & De Caluwé’s (2017) Tinder Study

• Individual differences in singles can account for Tinder motives

• Tinder users = more extraverted and open to new experiences than non-users

• Non-users = more conscientious than Tinder users

• No significant differences between agreeableness and neuroticism

What makes TikTok different from other platforms?

• Awareness of the algorithm

• Content without context

• Self-creation across (/in comparison to other) platforms

CMC

Computer-mediated communication

Deception

Intentionally presenting incorrect information OR omitting important information (goal: misleading to get a date)

Catfishing

Extreme misleading, romantic scam

Two Hypotheses of CMC on Friendship

Displacement Hypothesis & Stimulation Hypothesis

Displacement Hypothesis

Substitute for real friendship

Stimulation Hypothesis

Improve real friendships

Characteristics of friendship vs. acquaintances?

• Co-constructed

• Reciprocity

• Closeness

• Intimacy

Factors with Friendship Formation

• Proximity/Propinquity: Physical or psychological

• Homophily: People’s tendency to become friends with similar people

Consequences of New Media for Friendship

• Intimacy/closeness

• Companionship of new media for friendship

• Social support

• Tangible support & protection

• Exclusiveness

Intimacy/Closeness (in New Media Friendship)

• Fewer signals via CMC than face-to-face

• ‘True self’, self-expression, self-disclosure

Companionship (in New Media Friendship)

• CMC is mostly ‘talking’

• Shared activities are richer offline

Social Support (in New Media Friendship)

• More support possible via online channels

• Friendships can start with a call for help/support

• Forum communities

  • Subjects that are difficult to discuss

  • Offline - more difficult to find people experiencing same things/can understand you

Tangible Support & Protection (in New Media Friendship)

• Protection from conflicts can only be offered for cyberbullying

• No material support online, but …

• Financial support is easier to offer via online mobile banking + donations and crowdfunding

Exclusiveness (in New Media Friendship)

• Making time for each other is more difficult on social media

• Exclusively sharing info is more difficult

• Number of online friends and public interactions with them are visible on social media (cause jealousy)

Consequences of New Media on Conflict in Friendship

• Online messages are perceived more negatively

• Lack of non-verbal and paralinguistic cues can cause misunderstandings and conflicts

• Easier to terminate online friendships (stop responding, block, and unfriend)

Characteristics of Bonding Social Capital

• Strong ties

• Exclusive

• Group identity

Characteristics of Bridging Social Capital

• Weak ties

• Inclusive

• Information dissemination