16 September 2009

Netizens Redux

One of the cuter - or, if you're a dyspeptic grinch such as myself, sillier - memes regarding the internet is the notion that being online will somehow make us all smarter, wiser, nicer and oh so very democratic (or merely allow us all to be rich, hip and tanned through 'friction-free e-commerce'), an expression of a millennial capitalism debunked by Richard Barbrook's famous The Californian Ideology and Paulina Borsook's Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High Tech (PublicAffairs, 1999).

Fans have claimed that blog tools will turn us all into authors or citizen journalists. (Anyone who's read a batch of undergrad law essays might question the idea that access to a keyboard = readability.) Social Network Services (SNS) such as Facebook and MySpace will supposedly bring us all together. A mousepad will banish the woes of capitalism and disadvantage. Lou Rosetto thus said that
the idea that we need to worry about anybody being 'left out' is entirely atavistic to me, a product of that old economics of scarcity .... mass communication, mass production, mass poverty, mass markets, mass society, mass media, mass democracy - that's history. Ford and Marx are well and truly dead.
If you have a keyboard & connectivity you are eligible to become a Netizen, described by advocate Izumi Aizu as "global citizens".
... Netizens have direct knowledge and rich experience of most issues caused by the use of the Internet. If you are the parents, quite often your children know much better about using the Net than you are. ... Netizens are flexible, work more efficiently than many incumbent institutions where protocols and procedures take up too much time and act as barriers for timely decisions. ... Netizens are global citizens, not constrained by national boundaries. There are many communities of interest, spread globally, irrespective of geographic or other existing social boundaries. Netizen participation will increase diversity.

Netizens will counter economic balance, not dominated by large corporate interest, but adding non-profit, non-governmental forces. It will also provide cultural diversity, with multilingual environment. It will reduce the magnetization of the minority, too. By encouraging the Netizens to participate, affirmative efforts to listen to the minority groups, persons with disabilities, women in vulnerable situations, linguistic minorities, all will have more opportunities for their voices to be heard. Netizens share the view with technical community that freedom at the edge of the network is the core value of the Internet.
I was thus interested to read claims by one Australian pundit that Facebook is "the New Global Spokesman" -
The Lack of interpersonal politics on Facebook appears to inspire peace and harmony. It would appear that Facebook are achieving what all the great statesmen have been unable to achieve. That is, creating a Global level playing field whilst at the same time apparently removing distrust and promoting "joy de verve".
Better, I suppose, than Joi de veuve. The same author claims that
With Now 400 Million Users, Should Facebook Qualify for a seat in the United Nations

Facebook has done more for détente and political stability than any other single group of individuals. It has attracted 400 million users. The Applications have encouraged perfect strangers to extend trust and comradeship in the pursuance of a common goal. It has given those users a platform to express themselves freely ... Thats a lot of people with a common purpose. To be entertained in a socially enjoyable environment and not be bludgeoned to death with editorial opinion or advertising.
A Harvard Business School note offered a somewhat gloomier view, with the comment that
they enable a form of voyeurism. In real life there is a strong norm against prying into other people's lives. But online enables "a very delicate way for me to pry into your life without really prying," the researcher says. "Harvard undergrads do it all the time. They know all about each other before they meet face to face. 'Oh, you're that guy that did that internship in D.C. last summer.'"

Piskorski has also found deep gender differences in the use of sites. The biggest usage categories are men looking at women they don't know, followed by men looking at women they do know. Women look at other women they know. Overall, women receive two-thirds of all page views.
That's been reflected in comments about Facebook Stalking. Visions of Facebook and Twitter as blessedly free of editorial and advertising and unpolluted by commerce are naive. Facebook is commodifying its users and presenting those users with advertisements. Twitter's management has recently indicated that marketing may be a future feature of that service.

Assertions that Facebook's brought us all together may well get media coverage - and some snarky responses such as this post - but are about as credible as assertions that the BBC (or 'The Book' or 'Television' or 'The Printing Press') should get a seat at the UN, that realm of amity and understanding. If Facebook gets a seat, why not The Daily Telegraph, or the Canberra Raiders, or the Church of Scientology?

A sceptic would also question enthusiasm about online population figures, noting reports of substantial churn among Twitter and other social network services (which typically count everyone who's signed up as a member, even if membership lasts less than the lifespan of a gnat). Facebook coincidentally announced today that it had signed up 300 million members ... but what's a discrepancy of a 100 million or so when you're having fun.