New Media & Community - g45

In 1999, some people actually believed that world would end in 2000. It is intriguing to read articles published before the turn of the century because they articulate the fears felt by many in a changing world. Michael Ventura argues that our seemingly small choices have created the 21st century, and in 1994, he wrote “we’re already living in the 21st Century.” January 1st, 2000 was not different by drastic measures, and he is correct to say that our transformation began long before a set date. Ventura speaks from a perspective of what was lost, which in 1994 may have seemed greater then it actually turned out to be.

One can argue that traditional communities have been lost, but what if our definition of community is too narrow? Jennifer Singer was right to see that her grandmother will never understand the internet and the power it holds. Singer’s grandmother defined a community by those she could barrow sugar from, but today we can buy cookies and other baked goods already prepared. People no longer spend time in the same ways that their grandparents or even their parents once did. We have changed our boundaries, but Joshua Meyrowitz argues that “Communities are defined by their boundaries.” Based on Meyrowitz’s interpretations, if our boundaries are changing, then our communities are changing as well. Ventura believed that along with a changing community meant a loss of political stability. A community may no longer be tied together by similar beliefs, but online communities are. We want the future, but we don’t want change.

Change is not always a bad thing. People, such as Howard Rheingold, use the internet as a community. They see the value of communicating with people they will never meet whether or not it is for entertainment or informational purposes. The WELL organization morphed from the Whole Earth Catalog, crossing generations. People hold great hopes for the future, but forget that the future is happening in front of them. Singer believes that using the internet we are traveling alone, but Rheingold is far from alone when he is on the internet. Rheingold will probably not know who exactly he is speaking to in demographic terms, but that isn’t the main concern. In America we live in a world full of prejudices; the internet does not care how old we are, how much money we have, or what color our skin is. It is an open exchange of ideas and knowledge that unite people under beliefs.

Turner discussed the evolution of technology and how it changed the world. People have been united depending on location, religion, language and appearance for thousands of years, so why when we change what unifies people, do we consider it a loss? Human beings depend on communities, and communities will not disappear just because times change. We must adjust our definitions to fit the present, expanding idea of community.

People of the 20th century witnessed a burst of technological advancement. It is hard to believe that people in 2006 have enough hindsight to evaluate the effects of the internet. It took society over a hundred years to truly feel the effects that slavery left on society, so why do researches believe that a conclusion can be reached right now?

Diane Wieland wrote “Computer Addiction: Implications for Nursing Psychotherapy Practice,” looking into the topic of internet addiction. Wieland describes the tendencies of internet addicts to lose control of their internet use, causing “distress and/or functional impairment.”(p.154) Some people view the internet merely as another tool for information and communication; on the other hand, the internet is a community, almost a separate world, for internet addicts. How can we define the internet as a community, yet not treat it as one?

Wieland compares internet addiction to alcohol addiction, which is comparing an apple and an orange. Addictions that rely on substances to feel a sort of “high,” are incomparable to internet addictions. Internet addicts find themselves rapped up in virtual communities, which may fill the space of what the public deems “reality.” They may be addicted to feeling like a real person belonging to a community, which is not wrong. Robert Kraut et al. discussed the results of two studies, both showing that follow-ups reported generally more positive consequences of the internet then the first part of the studies. Kraut et al. also discussed the tendencies for introverts and extroverts using the internet. Extroverts broadened their social networks both on and off line, whereas introverts did not. It is possible that the internet draws introverts because of its medium. Virtual communities may replace “real communities” and internet addicts may prefer virtual communities to reality, which is not so hard to believe.

Barry Wellman and Milena Gulia discuss the relationships people form on the internet, and how similar or dissimilar they are to “real-life” relationships. Weak ties are abundant on the internet. Wellman and Gulia wrote, “Willingness to communicate with strangers online contrasts with in-person situations where bystanders are often reluctant to intervene and help strangers.”(p.341) It is in virtual communities, filled with weak ties, where introverts may come to life. Each human desires and needs different levels of support, and some people may find virtual communities may better satisfy their needs then the real world around them. So while Kraut finds that extroverts extend their social networks in reality, introverts may find comfort and community in their virtual reality. Wellman and Gulia also found that strong ties can be made in virtual communities, supporting my idea that introverts replace reality with their virtual community.

If internet addicts are merely replacing reality with virtual communities, then I would not classify their addiction as a disorder. Internet addicts may not function “properly” in society as we expect people to, but they function in their community properly. Every person can think of a friend, colleague, or family member that spends more time socializing then getting work done. Aren’t internet addicts just another version of this? If we define virtual communities as a type of community, then I believe it is wrong to label internet addicts with a disorder just because their values are different then ours.