Cyberstraying

Abstract
The increased popularity of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter has created an environment in which individuals can connect and reconnect with people across the world. Users are putting a dedicated amount of time into online friendships and relationships. This trend is causing challenges amongst marriages and monogamous face-to-face relationships (F2F). Since the rise of social networking in 2003, online infidelity has become an issue amongst people worldwide. This article examines the root cause of internet infidelity as well as the negative implications these relationships have on face-to-face relationships (F2F). This article discusses the signs of online infidelity as well as the communication tools and solutions individuals can use to prevent online infidelity.

Keywords: Online Infidelity, Cheating, Marriage, Social Networking, Relationships



Lipstick on the Collar, No More
Before the internet, if an individual found something lacking in their relationship with their partner, they often found themselves looking elsewhere. The bar, office, gentlemen’s club and other places where people gather provided such place. Envision the typical business man phoning his wife to inform her that he has a late night “meeting,” when in all actuality he is meeting up with his mistress. Today’s version of modern infidelity brings the “act” into the home, right under the unsuspecting partner’s nose on the personal computer.

Defining Online Infidelity
Recent argument over what type of action is deemed “online cheating” makes it often tricky to define. While one individual may argue that flirting over a Facebook private message isn’t cheating, another may beg to differ. According to Angelina Mao and Ahalya Raguram, authors of Online Infidelity: The New Challenges to Marriages,
…the definition of infidelity now includes a romantic and/or sexual relationship with someone other than the spouse, which begins with an online contact and is maintained mainly through electronic conversations that occur through e-mail and chat rooms. The emphasis is on the process whereby individuals already involved in a committed relationship seek to be involved in computer synchronous, interactive contacts with members of the opposite sex. A cyber affair can either be a continuous relationship specific to one online user or a series of random erotic chat room encounters with multiple online users. (Mao and Raguram, 2009)
What starts out as simple flirting often turns into more. “One in five adults questioned in a 2008 survey by the Pew Internet and American Life Project said they used online social networks to flirt with their connections.” (Davis, 2010) Individuals who find that they are spending large amounts of time in online relationships, versus placing emphasis on pre-existing face-to-face relationships, are often trying to replace the feelings, emotions and sensations that are lacking in the F2F environment. A recent program on Good Morning America, titled, Facebook Infidelity: Cheating Spouses Go Online, stated that, “Twenty percent of divorces involve Facebook and 80 percent of divorce lawyers have reported a spike in the number of cases that use social media for evidence, according to a survey by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.” (GMA, 2010)

Why Cheat?
According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, feelings of love and belonging are essential to humans being. We all crave the sensations of friendships, loving relationship, intimacy and desire. These feelings both sexual and non-sexual are important in providing individuals with the sensation of value and hope. Without the expression of love and being loved, feelings of loneliness, anxiety and depression often take over. Following the need to love and be loved is the need to have self-esteem, confidence and acceptance. Unfortunately many individuals who are in actual face-to-face relationships are not feeling as though their needs are met. People find themselves cheating for many reasons. Perhaps it comes down to the sheer fact that they are not happy with themselves therefore, how can they possibly be satisfied with their spouse or partner? Larry Carlat, Editor for Men’s Health Magazine discusses his various “Twitter Wives” and why he is drawn to this type of relationship in his article titled, Tweeting and Cheating. Carlat states that, “In many ways, the arc of a Twitter love affair is the same as it is offline; flirtation, lust, fierce attachment. But the virtual affair is condensed and sped up. Its enhanced hyperreality that feels better than real. It’s intimacy without domesticity. Eroticism without longevity. Commitment without the risk.” (Carlat, 2011)
Online relationships provide individuals with the power to possess control, trusting and knowing that at anytime, if things aren’t going the way they should, one can simply log-off or block that particular person. There is no “it’s not you, it’s me” speech to give, and let’s face it, who wants to really deal with all of that emotional stuff anyway? The beautiful thing about online dating, and online cheating is that you never have to remind your lover to flush the toilet, or pick their hair out of the drain. According to marriage counselor Terry Real, featured on Good Morning America, “Facebook can provide sort of a fantasy for a cheating spouse. There is nothing more seductive than the 'one that got away' fantasy is always better than someone who's up to her eyeballs in bills and diapers.”(Facebook Infidelity, 2010) With this element of fantasy comes heightened and enhanced profile pictures, lies about body size, career, fitness level etc. Both men and women, of all ages, race, body types and sexual preference are finding themselves avoiding marital conflict and counseling by attempting to get what they are missing F2F online, even if they do lie a little to attract a potential virtual “mate.” According to Dr. Kim Young’s ACE Model (1999) there are,
…three factors underlying the Internet's unique appeal to users who commit online infidelity: (a) Anonymity, as mentioned above, enables users to commit infidelity with decreased risk of social sanctions; (b) Convenience of chat rooms and instant messaging allows users to find easily, with a click of a mouse, an online partner with the specific attributes that are of interest to them; (c) Escaping to a different subjective reality is practicable online through fantasy. In this manner, for example, a housewife who feels undesired by her husband can experience online a revival of her youth through courtship by a younger male. (p.59-74)
Carlat states that, Twitter is about making connections. The secret is listening. If you can let women tell their stories, if you can be supportive and funny and let them get their shit out, they will fall in love with you. Even if they refuse to meet you.” (Carlat, 2011) In a nutshell, online relationships provide the sense of love and belonging, confidence and acceptance that Maslow deemed so important to the human psyche. With all of these needs met, it’s the perfect arrangement.

Marriage of Convenience: Face-to-Face vs. Online Relationships
F2F relationships require more work, they require you to show up and be present. F2F relationships allow us, as humans to really “see” and experience one another. All forms of expression and emotion incuding, sadness, anger, joy, can be expressed in F2F contact. I once read that the reason people cry when they laugh is because the tears are a primal sign of breaking down barriers. When an individual laughs and cries, the person viewing this response won’t be threatened, and therefore they soften, accepting the individual and possibly even creating a bond with them. This crucial element is lost amongst online relationships. Due to the nature of online communication or computer mediated communication (CMC) and the idea of anonymity, communication can often become enhanced, possibly where it normally wouldn't be in a F2F situation. Author, Krispin Thurlow (2004) explains, "People feel less afraid to speak their mind, less worried about their looks and less embarrassed to disclose things about themselves” (p. 62). CMC can be empowering, providing feelings of freedom, clearly having some advantages over F2F communication such as convenience (no fancy dates to pay for) and decreased awkwardness (no strange pauses during conversation, or pressure to take things to another level). However, since visual cues such as body language and vocal fillers such as "uh huh, and oh yeah" are absent in CMC, a plethora of communication is lost in cyberspace leaving the receiver with a smaller amount of information to work with. According to the Cuelessness Model of Communication, the lack of nonverbal cues and identity occurring in CMC often results in an increased “‘psychological distance', which leads to more impersonal communication." (Thurlow, p. 49)

Research and Analysis
Dr. Ilian Avriam and Dr. Yair Amichai-Hamburger both psychologists produced a study regarding online infidelity in 2005. This study represented,
“…two hundred participants who maintain a relationship in "real life" (who) were recruited through web advertisements, and filled in online questionnaires regarding their dyadic satisfaction, self-disclosure, narcissism, and their Internet relationship expectations. Results indicated that the predictors of Internet relationship expectations are the experience of having an Internet relationship, higher tendencies of manipulation and exhibitionism, lower self-disclosure and lower dyadic cohesion. However, dyadic and sexual satisfaction do not predict higher expectations of an Internet relationship, in contrast to real life relationships. (Avriam & Amichai-Hamburger, 2005).
Essentially, research shows that individuals who participate in acts of online fidelity are looking for a form of security, control and heightened level of satisfaction. In another words, someone to stroke their ego without having to do much work. Each of these elements can easily be attained with a click of the mouse.

Signs of Cheating
The internet is currently abuzz with dozens of websites about online infidelity. A simple Google search offers hundreds of sites featuring tools and techniques, warning signs and even private investigators available to hire to find out if your spouse or partner is cheating online. One website offers a tool that you can download to hack into the suspecting cheaters Facebook account. A popular blog titled, Facebookcheating.com, features an open floor where individuals who have been burned losing a lover/partner/spouse to a Facebook fling can speak out. This website is chock full of Facebook cheating stories of heartbreak, betrayal and deceit. If Facebook cheating victims need a place to vent, this is it.
Jennifer Angel, writer for the NYDailyNews.com lists the following warning signs in her article, Warning Signs of E-Infidelity (2011),
* Does your partner choose to log online late at night instead of going to bed with you? Is their internet search history erased the next morning?
* Your partner is instantly defensive if you ask to use their computer.
* Does your partner check their e-mail multiple times a day?
* Is your sweetie quick to minimize their computer screen when you walk into the room?
* Did they recently install a password on the computer?
* Have you come across a separate e-mail account that you never knew existed?
* Have you found an improper photograph or chat dialogue?
When viewing the above warning signs, the common thread indicated is the continuous lack of communication represented. Just as traditional infidelity, online infidelity demonstrates real life problems.

Picking up the Pieces
When a marriage or relationship is missing something, be it love, connection, understanding, patience or just lack of listening, it falls apart. The internet, Facebook, Twitter and the various other forms of CMC are not to blame, human beings not taking the time to give their F2F relationships the effort and dedication they need are to blame. The true path to healing for couples who can “pick up the pieces,” involve therapy. According to Mao and Ragurum (2009),
In couples who present with this issue, an exploration into the quality of their marital relationship and sexual satisfaction is necessary. Marital therapy is implicated in dealing with the underlying issues contributing to online infidelity and in restoring marital trust. More research is needed in the area of online infidelity because of the deleterious impact it has on marriage and the consequent impact on the mental health of the partners. (p.309)

As the internet becomes even more popular in years to come, I predict a shift in the way individuals view online communication. What is now viewed as “virtual” communication may eventually be seen as a more “real” or “authentic” form of communication. This shift will in turn change the way we form relationships, both on and offline. Continued research into the topic of internet infidelity will hopefully ensure a better environment for safe and honest relationships both F2F and through CMC.

References
Angel, J. (2011). Warning signs of e-infidelity. NY Daily News.com. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/horoscopes/2011/06/30/2011-06-30_warning_signs_of_einfidelity_.html
Aviram, I., and Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2005). Online infidelity: aspects of dyadic satisfaction, self-disclosure, and narcissism. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), article 1. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/aviram.html
Carlat, L. (2011). Tweeting & cheating. Men’s Health. P. 150-155.
Davis, C. (2010). Divorce, facebook style. The Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved from http://www.aaml.org/sites/default/files/Divorce,%20Facebook%20style.pdf
Facebook Infidelity: Cheating spouses go online. (2010). Good Morning America. [script] Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/facebook-infidelity-cheating-spouses-online/story?id=12272421
Mao, A., & Raguram, A. (2009). Online infidelity: The new challenge to marriages. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 51(4), 302-304. doi:10.4103/0019-5545.58299
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., Tomic, A. (2004) Computer mediated communication: social interaction and the internet. California: Sage
Young, K. S., Griffin-Shelly, E., Cooper, A., O'Mara, J., & Buchanan, J. (2000). Online infidelity: A new dimension in couple relationships with implications for evaluation and treatment. Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity, 7 (1/2), 59-74

Twain on Technology

The following essay examines authors Neil Postman and Todd Gitlin’s views of society and technology. Both authors express concern regarding modern day society’s reliance and eagerness to embrace technology and change. Postman, describes the feeling tone of the situation saying, “Something has happened in America that is strange and dangerous, and there is only a dull and even stupid awareness of what it is-in part because it has no name. I call it Technopoly.” (Postman, 1992, p. 20) This essay will also take a look at American icon Mark Twain’s visionary example. Through thoughtful observation of society during Twains lifetime, the mid to late 1800’s and present day society, one can form a more realistic and objective opinion answering the question, “Are we really living in Postman’s proclaimed strange and dangerous society?”

Technology critics Neil Postman author of Technopoly (1992) and Todd Gitlin author of Media Unlimited (2002), have a strong belief that technology, scientific progress and inventions just may be exactly what our society doesn’t need. Gitlin, suggests that we live in an “information society, but no less, if less famously, a society of feeling and sensation.” (Gitlin, 2002, p.36) Gitlin’s observation of society is accurate, but also raises the question, hasn’t society always been one of feeling and sensation? Where along the way did society transform from a dull, sensation-less experience into one of vibrancy? Gitlin suggests that human desire may perhaps be the cause of this information society. The root of this explanation may be best explained with the idea that humans have always possessed desire. It is a common trait, and even though it may not always be met, it will still exist. The difference between modern day societies (information society) versus society 100 years ago, is that we now have the ability to fulfill our desires more readily. If an individual in the early 20th century were to want to know how the pages on a book were printed, he would have to make a journey to a print shop and observe the process. Today, however, curiosities can simply be met by a Google search for “how books are printed,” within seconds, video, audio, images and text are at one’s disposal providing endless information on the topic of choice. According to Gitlin, “all these human desires in their complexity and contradiction are indulged in the vast circus maximus, our cultural jamboree of jamborees.”(p. 27) If asked about human desire and society, in his time, famous American author, Mark Twain would most likely agree with Gitlin, possibly stating that, “A human being has a natural desire to have more of a good thing than he needs.” (Mark Twain, n.d.) This is not to say that it is a bad thing. Desire often fuels advancement, industry and positive change.

Mark Twain (original name Samuel Clemens) once said that “Inventors are the creators of the world, after God.” (Mark Twain, n.d.) Best known for his famous books, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (1876) and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1885), Mark Twain is a true example of an open-minded visionary with a true love for science and technology. Twains early years were spent in Hannibal, Missouri during the mid 1800’s. Twain participated in a variety of odd jobs that included working in as an apprentice to a printer, journalist, and Mississippi river boat captain, these positions would eventually help shape him into the well-rounded, humorous and eccentric individual as well as, one of America’s most inspiring authors and critics. Time Magazine wrote in 2008 that Twain,

…represents a vital tradition in American politics and culture: the comedic commentator on serious matters, the funnyman as our collective conscience who can utter uncomfortable truths that more solemn critics evade. In an election year when so many Americans are getting their news from nontraditional sources, Twain is the godfather of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert as well as the comic voices who influenced them, from Lenny Bruce to Richard Pryor to Kurt Vonnegut. And Twain, with Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, created the literary DNA that helped shape race relations in America over the past century.” (Stengel, 2008)

Twain’s overall curiosity about the world around him spawned a deep fascination for science and technology, eventually forming a friendship with inventor Nikola Tesla. Twain invested in an early version of the printing press and was also an inventor himself. “Twain patented three inventions, including an “Improvement in Adjustable and Detachable Straps for Garments” (to replace suspenders) and a history trivia game. Most commercially successful was a self-pasting scrapbook; a dried adhesive on the pages only needed to be moistened before use.” (J. Niemann, 2004, p.53)
Mark Twain is an excellent example of an individual who clearly demonstrated a love for both older traditions, ways of life, and new frontiers and technology. When asked in a letter to be a spokesman for an advertisement for the typewriter, Twain replied the following,

Please do not use my name in any way. Please do not even divulge the fact that I own a machine. I have entirely stopped using the typewriter for the reason that I never could write a letter without receiving a request by return mail that I would not only describe the machine but state what progress I had made in the use of it, everything, et cetera, et cetera. I don't like to write letters, and so I don't want people to know I own this curiosity-breeding little joker. (Flatow, 2010)

The argument over technology being to invasive in and involved in today’s society creates the image of a game of tug ‘o’ war, technology on one side and a simpler traditional way of life on the other. Postman describes how Twain was a man dabbling on both sides of the rope.

“We may get a sense of the interplay between technocracy and Old World values in the work of Mark twain, who was fascinated by the technical accomplishments of the nineteenth century. He said of it that it was ‘the plainest and sturdiest and infinitely greatest and worthiest of all the centuries the world has seen.” (Postman, 1992, p.46)

Mark Twain was well known for being a curious type, dabbling in a variety of real world experiences, and then transforming his attained knowledge into written word for the rest of the world to understand. Twain once described a bit of a technological hiccup that might be what Postman and Gitlin are getting at when they relish in their longings for a less technological society. Twain wrote, “Isn't it odd that we should take a spasm, every now and then, and go spinning back into the dark ages once more, after having put in a world of time and money and work toiling up into the high lights of modern progress?”(Mark Twain, n.d.) Twain’s words are clear evidence that although he found solitude on the quiet banks of the Mississippi watching the water and listening to the birds, he equally relished in the excitement of the rolling steamboats and paddle wheelers, printing press, and typewriters that represented a new world, one of advancement, one of excitement with endless possibilities and new beginnings.

References

Flatow, Ira (interviewer) & Lichtman, Flora (interviewee). (2010). Mark Twain and Science: It’s Complicated. [Interview Transcript]. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130268526
Gitlin, T. (2002). Media unlimited: how the torrent of images and sounds overwhelms our lives. New York: Metropolitan Books.
J. Niemann, Paul (2004-11). Invention Mysteries (Invention Mysteries Series). Horsefeathers Publishing Company. pp. 53–54
Mark Twain Quotes. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.twainquotes.com/Invention.html
Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly: the surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.
Stengel, Richard. (2008). The Mark of Twain. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1820141,00.html


Image Source: http://www.sundancechannel.com/sunfiltered/2011/01/photo-of-mark-twain-holding-tesla-light/

A History of Oral Cultures: A World Without Written Word

The following essay will examine the differences between oral and literate societies through examining the research of Walter Ong, and discoveries made by world renowned linguist, Noam Chomsky. By examining the history of oral communication, individuals who rely heavily on written word may find this insight to be helpful in portraying a clear image of these two societies and their differences as well as their strengths and weaknesses.

The Organic State of Oral Communication
As human beings, we are born with the ability to see, touch, taste and hear the world around Imagine what it’s being a baby during the first few moments of birth. From the instant you come into the world, you quickly become bombarded with a multitude of sensory experiences. Moving from your comfortable and perfectly climate controlled environment to a bright, cold and very unfamiliar place. This alone is enough to make anyone stressed out leaving you longing to return to where you just came from. Just when things couldn’t get any worse, you hear it, a familiar sound, one that is smooth, vibrating through your entire body soothing every little care that just moments ago seemed so big. This experience is louder, more clearly than what you’ve known previously but it feels like home, and therefore is good. You open your eyes for the first time, longing to know where it came from, and then you see her, your Mother.
Although we have all gone through the above experience, the majority of us have no recollection of it (unless there is a very good Psychologist specializing in regression therapy involved.) Instead, we just trust that the organic nature of hearing helps us form early bonds with our parents and individuals that bring us up as children. This example helps illustrates the concept of primary orality, having absolutely no concept of the written word or print yet relying solely on sound, cadence and auditory levels and pitch of the voice, facial expressions, and body language. If you can imagine the same experience as described above, only as the child comes into the world, he is immediately handed a piece of paper from his Mother with written text affirming love and promises of a great life together. As absurd as this concept sounds, it is a clear way to demonstrate literacy.

The Origin of Speech
In the Bible’s story of creation, Adam is clearly the first human being to ever speak. In Genesis 2:19 in the New International Version Bible, the portrayal of what are possibly Adam’s first spoken words are as follows:
Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. (NIV, p.9)
In Genesis, Adam’s conversation with God leads to the creation of Eve, and so the creation story of man and woman is complete. For some, the idea that God created Adam in his own image and therefore Adam just began speaking may be enough for some, however for those that want to get down to the actual origin of language, this might prove to be difficult. Although many scholars are baffled by the origin of speech, many continue to develop theories and concepts to help further understand this basic, yet so profound process of oral communication. Overall, humans seem to be born with the innate ability to communicate and express themselves vocally, and yet scientists and linguists are still unsure of how humans first developed the ability to speak. World renowned linguist, Noam Chomsky is possibly the world’s leading expert on this exact subject matter, however when interviewed by MIT News and asked the question, “when did human’s start to speak,” Chomsky’s immediate response is, “I don’t think we have a prayer of answering that on the basis of anything that’s now understood.” (Chase, 1992) Chomsky appears to firmly support the idea that language is part of our biological design, “Contrary to what people thought, language is not taught, not even learned. It's something that your mind grows in a particular environment, just the way your body grows in a particular environment.” (Chase, 1992) This theory would clearly explain the differences in communication amongst oral societies across the globe. For example, few tribes in Africa use a form of oral communication called ‘clicking’ using a number of tongue clicking sounds to convey their message. If a Caucasian baby were to be raised from a young age amongst one of the African tribes that possess this language, that baby would use that form of dialect to communicate. Oral language is one of those tricky things that cannot be explained. This can also be seen amongst people in America where the primary language is English, there are a whole slew of dialects and accents that directly related to the location of where a person is raised.

Primary Oral Cultures
Imagine what it would be like to live in a society with no books, internet, magazines or newspapers, in fact, no written word at all? Professor Walter Ong coined the term primarily oral culture for societies such as this that still exist to this day. Ong discusses this lack of writing in his 1982 book Orality and Literacy and the issue of not being able to “look something up” as you would in a literate society, Ong states that, “Without writing, words as such have no visual presence, even when the objects they represent are visual. They are sounds. You might ‘call’ them back –‘recall’ them, but there is nowhere to ‘look’ for them. They have no reference or trace.” (p.30) In an oral society, sound is dynamic. Because of the lack of written language, words are not as fluent as they would be in a literate society. In fact, primitive people view words as being very powerful. Ong discusses this idea stating that,
Sound cannot be sounding without the use of power. A hunter can see a buffalo, smell, taste and touch a buffalo when the buffalo is completely inert; even dead, but if he hears a buffalo: he had better watch out: something is going on. In this sense, all sound, and especially oral utterance, which comes from inside living organisms, is ‘dynamic.’(p.32)
In an essence, oral communication, the ability to rely solely on expression through speech and listening is a survival skill. Surprisingly enough, the majority of cultures are oral. “Of the some 3000 languages spoken, that exists today only some 78 have a literature”. (p.7) This particular fact is somewhat astonishing to imagine in such a high-tech world where the majority of people you interact with on a daily basis communicate just as much in writing (via text messaging, facebook, tweeting, email etc.) than they do orally.

Secondary Oral Cultures
The notion of a primary oral culture may seem so far away to the typical American, however the idea of a secondary oral culture, one that has a literature but still prefers oral communication over written word actually exists as a sub-group amongst Americans. Older generations frequently mistrust methods of computer mediated communication (CMC) because they are more comfortable with oral communication, using the telephone, or stopping by a friend’s house to convey a message versus sending them an email or text message. Even today’s most modern scholarly individuals may find oral communication to be superior over written depending on the situation. For example, if a loved one dies, it is clearly more appropriate and human to orally communicate this message than to write it.
In a discussion between Socrates and Phaedrus written in Plato’s Phaedrus, Plato writes:
Writing, you know, Phaedrus, has this strange quality about it, which makes it really like painting: the painter's products stand before us quite as though they were alive; but if you question them, they maintain a solemn silence. So, too, with written words: you might think they spoke as though they made sense, but if you ask them anything about what they are saying, if you wish an explanation, they go on telling you the same thing, over and over forever. Once a thing is put in writing, it rolls about all over the place, falling into the hands of those who have no concern with it just as easily as under the notice of those who comprehend; it has no notion of whom to address or whom to avoid. And when it is ill-treated or abused as illegitimate, it always needs its father to help it, being quite unable to protect or help itself. (p.67)
Transitioning From an Oral Society to a Literate Society
Is today’s heavily enriched literate society and the ever increasing CMC replacing oral communication a sign of an increased transition from oral societies to literate? The answer is yes. With satellite technology and advances in educational program availability for third world countries, we are likely to see a shift occurring with a decrease in the oral communication exclusive societies. This advancement however can only exist with either the creation of a new written language, or an adaptation to another.




References

Chase, Naomi (Interviewer) and Chomsky, N. (Interviewee). (1992). Chomsky Explores Origins of Language [Interview Transcript]. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/1992/chomsky-0401.html
Holy Bible: New International Study Version. (1995). Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House.
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. (Chapter 3). Retrieved from https://learn.gonzaga.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-701532-dt-content-rid-805906_1/courses/COML509_A2_11965_FA011/COML509_A1_21816_SP11_ImportedContent_20110107075456/COML509_B1_11722_FA010_ImportedContent_20101013085144/GORG-COML-509-Inagaki-Master_ImportedContent_20100819115744/Course%20Resources/COPYRIGHT%20NOTICE/embedded/ong1.pdf
Trans. W. C. Helmbold and W. G. Rabinowitz. Plato. Phaedrus. Indianapolis: Library of Liberal Arts-Bobbs, 1956. Retrieved from http://people.ucalgary.ca/~dabrent/webliteracies/platowri.htm

In With The In Crowd: The Ease of Making Friends In a Virtual World

Everyone remembers their first day of school. The newness of it all. The teacher, your classmates, even your crayons are new. Oh the smell of new crayons. What an adventure. And then it hits you…everything is new. I am new, and therefore I can be anyone I want to be. I can make new friends and form new groups. Ah, the joys of being young everything is fresh, shiny and new.

Unfortunately, as we age, we get, well…old. With age we form habits, gain responsibility, buy in to stereotypes and develop our own ideas of what friendships and group interactions should be like. It becomes increasingly more difficult to make new friends, and to find new groups that we feel comfortable interacting in.

Life on the Playground
If you observe a child in an environment with other children you will find that they are extremely quick to assimilate. Last week, my son started his first day of 3rd grade at a new school. I watched him closely lining up with his classmates. “I like your shoes” said the boy standing behind him. My son looked down at his new shoes, stomping them to make them light up and then replied, “Thanks, they light up.” The boy then replied, “Do you like my new shoes? My Mom say’s they have good arch support.” “Yeah they are really cool,” said my son. The two boys smiled and started chatting about Star Wars. Soon after, two other boys joined the conversation simply by, smiling and tossing in their thoughts and favorite characters from the movie. My son had assimilated into a group at his school and the first bell hadn’t even rung. This observation made me think to myself, why can’t adults form groups of friends and associates that easy? I have stood in multiple lines throughout my life, waiting at the airport, at the grocery checkout line, post office, DMV, the list goes on. What would I say? “Are you excited to get your new drivers license?” “Wow, you are buying eggs too, we have so much in common, we should be friends!” After pondering the ease of my sons interaction in the school line, it hit me, the conversation I had just heard between my son and his new friends reminded me of a dialogue I had recently had between some of my new friends that I made in an online group on Facebook. During the prior week, a friend had suggested I join a group she was involved with because we share similar interests. I made a request to join, and within an hour was a part of a group. I instantly logged on and began reading others posts and responding to their comments. A lady by the name of Christina caught my eye, she was wearing a shirt with the words, I can see Alaska from my house. I immediately commented on her page. “Hi, my name is Amanda, I love your shirt.” Christina quickly posted back, “Thanks, it’s one of my favorites. I can tell you where I bought it. And by the way, I love your haircut.” Later that day, others from the group began posting on the thread that I had started, they too liked her shirt, and my haircut! And just like that, I had assimilated into a new group and it was so easy.

The above examples lead me to begin pondering, why is it so much easier to assimilate in a group environment online than it is in real life? Why is it, human beings, particularly adults have an easier time making friends in an online environment than in everyday real life?

Face to Face Group Interaction vs. Virtual Group Interaction: What SIDE Are You On?
According to Krispin Thurlow (2004) author of Computer Mediated Communication: Social Interaction and the Internet, “…we don’t need F2F (Face-to-Face) spoken communication to feel part of a group. In fact, it can be better if people don’t see each other.” (p. 66) Regardless of how “open-minded” we deem ourselves, it is in our nature, as humans to make judgments about one another within the first few moments of interaction grasping on to physical appearance (hair color, clothing style, tattoos etc.) and other physical markers such as the individuals facial expression or voice. Since these markers are rarely apparent in the virtual world, we often form a quick and strong connection to individuals via Computer Mediated Communication (CMC).

The Social Identity Model of Communication (SIDE) is described as being:
Based on the idea that a person’s identity is comprised of their individual identity and their group or social identity. Sometimes our personal identity is important to us: at other times, however, we prefer to think of ourselves as being like other people and so we prioritize our social identity.” (Thurlow, 2004 p.67)

This particular statement helps explain why it is far easier for young children to make friends so quickly. Psychologists, Henri Tajfel and John C. Turners, Social Identity Theory, “explains how intergroup relations, more specifically how identifying positively with the in-group and negatively judging the out-group helps individuals gain self-esteem.” (Stets & Burke, 2000 p. 226) Since young children are typically unaware and less bias than adults are regarding what traits an out-group possesses as well as not having yet formed a strong sense of social identity, friendships form more easily. The majority of adults would find it extremely awkward to walk into a party of new people, stand in a group and join in on a discussion without first going through the motions of introduction; get to know you questions etc. As socially strange as this may sound, people do it every day, only online. CMC is often described as a being a ‘richer’ form of communication than face-to-face communication because it provides a more open field environment. “With fewer social and nonverbal cues, we’re more likely to give people the benefit of the doubt. And the more salient social identity is for participants the greater group cohesion will be.” (Thurlow, 2004 p. 67) To basically sum it up, it is more difficult for adults to assimilate into groups frankly because we are quick to form judgments and ideas of others before we truly get to know them. CMC makes it easy to quickly fit into a group because we are able to bypass all of the road blocks that often pop up when making new friendships and joining groups. Not only is this a more simple approach, it is convenient. In today’s hustle bustle society, there is often very little time left for social interaction, friendships and group memberships. The ease of being able to hang out in your pajamas with your virtual book club may sound more enticing to an individual who has put in a full work week than dressing up and meeting at the local library.

CMC Can Enhance F2F Communication
As explored above, CMC has proven itself to be a ‘rich’ form of communication actually enhancing individual’s lives and possibly removing bias and stereotypes. Every day, more and more people log onto their Face book accounts, text, Twitter, blog and Tweet about all of the little details of their lives. In a way, CMC is helping to shrink the world, making it a friendlier place. Clive Thomson, NY Times author writes:
One of the big draws of online social networks is the constant flow of information. Experts call this information -- the status updates, posted notes and thoughts, photos -- ambient information. These little bits of data floating around in your brain ("Chuck had a really great roast beef sandwich yesterday!") can even lead to more meaningful face-to-face interactions. Knowing all these little tidbits about each other eliminates the need for fact-finding small talk, letting friends get right to the good stuff when they're meeting up after work or school (Thompson, 2008).
According to the statistics page located on the Facebook website, the site now boasts over 750 million active users. The average member is connected to 80 different groups, events and organizations. These statistics are important leading me to wonder, with all of this ‘rich’ communication occurring on a daily basis, friendships being formed, and groups created, could social networking change the world as we know it for the better? I have a feeling that human interactions and relationships are moving in a new direction and would love to see more research on the topic of CMC effects on F2F communication. Who knows, all of this CMC might actually push adults to be a little more comfortable in F2F communication. Perhaps we will let our walls fall down, make more small talk and learn to form friendships over buying eggs.
References

Facebook [Statistics Page]. Retrieved September 10, 2011 from http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics

Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224-237.

Thomson, Clive. "Brave New World of Digital Intimacy." New York Times. Sept. 5, 2008. (September 10, 2011) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07awareness-t.html?pagewanted=all

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., Tomic, A. (2004) Computer mediated communication: social interaction and the internet. California: Sage

Picture Reference:
http://www.bing.com/url?source=images&rch=vdkm-raAoqM3cThxGSuPJzpDzL4s5Z6&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmarketreacher.com%2Farchives%2F365&urltarget=_blank&q=chat+groups&view=detail&&id=7633D83EAD7570A897F4966E3A179A813BC5EA80&first=0&FORM=IDFRIR&ssIG=8662a033dcaf4a18bac71f0216dcd5ab