Recently I experienced what can only be described as a conflict of opinions, with my own a notable absence. Despite previously having claimed membership to numerous online communities with little participation credit to my name, it was not until recently that my virtual involvement grew immensely.
To begin, I will address my experience which lead to the topic of this blog, differences between online and offline communities, being chosen. As mentioned earlier whilst I have claimed virtual membership previously without participating, a characteristic Bruns, media academic, claims to be solely available to online communities (Bruns, 2008, online), one particular blog caught my emotions and was deserving of a reply. Since I attended a single-sex inner-city high school, I strongly believe in equality of opportunity between the sexes. This blog in particular, with hundreds of members, used derogatory language and snide comments to degrade one gender. It was these comments that prompted me to publish my opinions.
In Bruns’ lecture regarding online communities, reasons as to why individuals become involved were discussed. Yet blogging as a response to conflicting opinions between online communities was discussed through connections to negative outcomes. However, whilst I largely agree with Bruns’ view, what I experienced can be discussed through alternative view points.
Consequently, through further investigation of why individuals become involved, I established that two clear belief branches exist. The first is that individuals participate in online communities to communicate with others instantaneously about common interests. The second is that individuals become involved as a means of increasing their ability to partake in democratic practices stemming from online conflict.
Bruns describes reasons of involvement through the first view, analysing differences existing between online and offline communities. According to Bruns virtual communities are differentiated by boundaries, such that offline communities are restricted by geographical and physical boundaries compared with online communities, which are free of this restraint (Bruns, 2008, online). As a result of this freedom, individuals are therefore able to communicate instantaneously with any number of others about a range of topics (Flew, 2004, pg. 43), from the general to the more specific. Furthermore, Bruns indicates, that similar to my experience, individuals are able to claim membership to online groups irrespective of participation frequency. However, interesting I found myself disagreeing with Bruns’ view that as online communities can become quite insular (Bruns, 2008, online) many individuals join virtual communities only when they are accepting of the blog topic.
As this content was not demonstrated through my response, I located alternative perspectives, including those of Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerberg, and Harvard academic, Shalini Venturelli. This view indicates that conflict between online communities is what encourages others to themselves become involved – in an attempt to get their own opinions published. According to media academic Flew, online communities stemmed from social activism (2004, pg. 66), whereby the web is used as a means for differing views to be given equal opportunity. Whilst Bruns claims this can lead to some individuals using the web for self expression in a sinister manner (Bruns, 2008, online), it is the belief that individuals choose to blog in response to others opinions that was illustrated through my own actions.
Consequently, whilst it is Bruns’ view, which is largely marginalised, I found it interesting the way in which my actions were represented through alternative perspectives. It is these beliefs that will encourage me to continue to blog on topics that I am passionate about, even if others exist which oppose them.
Bibliography
Bruns, A. 2008. KCB201 Virtual Cultures: Week 6 Podcast, Online Communities. http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_29175_1 (accessed April 15, 2008).
Flew, T. 2004. New Media: An Introduction, 2nd Ed., South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
To begin, I will address my experience which lead to the topic of this blog, differences between online and offline communities, being chosen. As mentioned earlier whilst I have claimed virtual membership previously without participating, a characteristic Bruns, media academic, claims to be solely available to online communities (Bruns, 2008, online), one particular blog caught my emotions and was deserving of a reply. Since I attended a single-sex inner-city high school, I strongly believe in equality of opportunity between the sexes. This blog in particular, with hundreds of members, used derogatory language and snide comments to degrade one gender. It was these comments that prompted me to publish my opinions.
In Bruns’ lecture regarding online communities, reasons as to why individuals become involved were discussed. Yet blogging as a response to conflicting opinions between online communities was discussed through connections to negative outcomes. However, whilst I largely agree with Bruns’ view, what I experienced can be discussed through alternative view points.
Consequently, through further investigation of why individuals become involved, I established that two clear belief branches exist. The first is that individuals participate in online communities to communicate with others instantaneously about common interests. The second is that individuals become involved as a means of increasing their ability to partake in democratic practices stemming from online conflict.
Bruns describes reasons of involvement through the first view, analysing differences existing between online and offline communities. According to Bruns virtual communities are differentiated by boundaries, such that offline communities are restricted by geographical and physical boundaries compared with online communities, which are free of this restraint (Bruns, 2008, online). As a result of this freedom, individuals are therefore able to communicate instantaneously with any number of others about a range of topics (Flew, 2004, pg. 43), from the general to the more specific. Furthermore, Bruns indicates, that similar to my experience, individuals are able to claim membership to online groups irrespective of participation frequency. However, interesting I found myself disagreeing with Bruns’ view that as online communities can become quite insular (Bruns, 2008, online) many individuals join virtual communities only when they are accepting of the blog topic.
As this content was not demonstrated through my response, I located alternative perspectives, including those of Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerberg, and Harvard academic, Shalini Venturelli. This view indicates that conflict between online communities is what encourages others to themselves become involved – in an attempt to get their own opinions published. According to media academic Flew, online communities stemmed from social activism (2004, pg. 66), whereby the web is used as a means for differing views to be given equal opportunity. Whilst Bruns claims this can lead to some individuals using the web for self expression in a sinister manner (Bruns, 2008, online), it is the belief that individuals choose to blog in response to others opinions that was illustrated through my own actions.
Consequently, whilst it is Bruns’ view, which is largely marginalised, I found it interesting the way in which my actions were represented through alternative perspectives. It is these beliefs that will encourage me to continue to blog on topics that I am passionate about, even if others exist which oppose them.
Bibliography
Bruns, A. 2008. KCB201 Virtual Cultures: Week 6 Podcast, Online Communities. http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_29175_1 (accessed April 15, 2008).
Flew, T. 2004. New Media: An Introduction, 2nd Ed., South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment