Papacharissi,+Zizi.+The+virtual+geographies+of+social+networks+-+a+comparative+analysis+of+Facebook,+LinkedIn+and+ASmallWorld

=**Zizi Papacharissi. "The virtual geographies of social networks: a comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn and ASmallWorld."**= New Media Society 2009. Electronic. http://nms.sagepub.com/content/11/1-2/199

=Abstract=

This study provided a comparative analysis of three social network sites, the open-to-all Facebook, the professionally oriented LinkedIn and the exclusive, members-only ASmallWorld.The analysis focused on the underlying structure or architecture of these sites, on the premise that it may set the tone for particular types of interaction.Through this comparative examination four themes emerged;highlighting the private/public balance present in each social networking site, styles of self-presentation in spaces privately public and publicly private, cultivation of taste performances as a mode of sociocultural identification and organization and the formation of tight or loose social settings. Facebook emerged as the architectural equivalent of a glasshouse, with a publicly open structure, looser behavioral norms and an abundance of tools that members use to leave cues for each other. LinkedIn and ASmallWorld produced tighter spaces, which were consistent with the taste ethos of each network and offered less room for spontaneous interaction and network generation. = = =Annotation= The point Zizi Papacharissi tried to get across with the article “The Virtual Geographies of Social Networks: A Comparative Analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn, and ASmallWorld” was that each of those social networking sites have different types of architecture. They are set up in different ways that guide the user’s social interactions. Each site has its own set of rules and is either open or exclusive. Facebook is open to everyone and the users are free to add whomever they want. LinkedIn only allows users to add friends if they know each other or have a mutual friend. ASmallWorld is an invite-only community with very limited social interaction.

Papacharissi informs the reader that the way a site is set up, its geography and architecture, dictates how users can interact and display things such as interest and taste. Papacharissi also explains that each site has different classes of people. ASmallWorld is an elite site just by its exclusivity. Facebook, although it started as a limited site, is open to anyone and allows a high level of social interaction. The author shows this through a study done with access to each of the three sites. Navigation through the profiles, applications, and other aspects of the sites provided evidence that each site’s design influenced or dictated the way the user interacted with other users. That is the main point of the article.

=Argument=

Papacharissi argues that the presentation of self is largely controlled by the language and architecture of social media sites. While ethos-centered sites (Facebook) focus on qualities of self, other sites (LinkedIn and ASmallWorld) rely less on personal information than on tangible network systems - what often reduces these networks to "public displays of connection." These differences are negotiated partially on the part of individuals, but also on the part of the technologies that exist (the affordance concept).

=Key Passages=

"...naming is always an exercise in power … The future of cyberspace, therefore, will be determined not only through the invention of new hardware, but also through the names we employ to describe it." (200)

"...social networking site users frequently interpret cues deposited in member profiles, such as messages on Facebook ‘walls’ or pictures of member friends, to make inferences about the member’s character." (203)

"What ‘language’ do individuals develop as they introduce, present and connect themselves on different social networking sites and how is this language influenced, if at all, by architecture?" (204)

Social Media defined: "For the purposes of this study, social networking site architecture is defined as composite result of structure, design and organization, and this analysis focuses on these combined three components with the understanding that they are all specified by programming code." (205)

"Electronic media are characterized by their ability to remove, or at least rearrange, the boundaries between public and private spaces, affecting our lives not so much through content, but rather ‘by changing the ‘situational geography’ of social life.'" (206)

Social Media characterized by 1. Membership; 2. Internal/external access to private information; 3. Ability to control surroundings. (207)

On self-performance on the Internet / "face" (Goffman): "Given the level of control over verbal and non-verbal cues in a variety of online contexts, individuals may put together controlled performances that ‘give off’ exactly the ‘face’ that they intend." (210)

On affordance: "From this interactionist perspective, the communicative affordances of technology are seamlessly negotiated among individuals, society and the technology itself, producing technology that is both ‘socially shaped and socially shaping." (216) = = =Selected Works Cited=

Alexa (2008) ‘Traffic Rankings’, July, URL (consulted July 2008): http://www.alexa.com

Ellison, N.B., C. Steinfield and C. Lampe (2007) ‘The Benefits of Facebook ‘Friends:’ Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12(4), URL (consulted 5 November 2008): http://jcmc.indiana.edu/ vol12/issue4/ellison.html

Fairclough, N. (2000) ‘Critical Analysis of Media Discourse’, in P. Marris and S.Thornham (eds) Media Studies:A Reader (2nd edn), pp. 308–25. New York: New York University Press.

Haythornthwaite, C. (2002a) ‘Strong,Weak and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media’, The Information Society 18(5): 385–401.

Johnson, B. (2007) ‘Facebook v. Myspace:A Class Divide’,The Guardian, 26 June, URL (consulted 15 May 2008): http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/26/usa.news

Papacharissi, Z. (2007) ‘The Blogger Revolution? Audiences as Media Producers’, in M.Tremayne (ed.) Blogging, Citizenship and the Future of Media, pp. 21–39. New York: Routledge