A group (often termed as a community, e-group or club) is a feature in many social networking services which allows users to create, post, comment to and read from their own interest- and niche-specific forums, often within the realm of virtual communities. Groups, which may allow for open or closed access, invitation and/or joining by other users outside the group, are formed to provide mini-networks within the larger, more diverse social network service. Much like electronic mailing lists, they are also owned and maintained by owners, moderators, or managers, who can edit posts to discussion threads and regulate member behavior within the group. However, unlike traditional Internet forums and mailing lists, groups in social networking services allow owners and moderators alike to share account credentials between groups without having to log in to every group.
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/3Views:3 57915 86622 811
-
Online social networking can be good for teens
-
[OPEN SOURCE]: How to make your own private social network
-
Basics of Social Network Analysis
Transcription
Popular press portrays media as sort of being a danger or risk for teens and we thought that it’s quite probable that they’re using it for social reasons that could be beneficial. I think what’s unique about the research we do here and with the children’s digital media center is that rather than looking at the impact media have on children, we’re really interested in what are the developmental processes and needs that children have and how our media are being used in service of those. And for us, we were really interested in social connections and intimacy and how teens might be using this social space, this very popular social space, to address those needs. There are common concerns about “digital ink is permanent” and I think that adolescents don’t appreciate that. In our own study, we didn’t see youth engaging in risky behaviors or seeking out strangers or posting personal things. Within our data, what we find is that youth are really using social networking sites to connect to people they know from their offline world and to build connections with them. I'm definitely closer to people that I wouldn't normally be as close to without them. Maybe they're my friends, but I don't have class with them or some of my friends live on the east coast. It gives us something to talk about and also it gives you more one on one, especially Skype where you can actually talk to them one on one. So when started the study we expected to see a lot of overlap between teens online and offline worlds which we did, but when we asked teens to name the ten people they interact most with online on social networking sites like Facebook or MySpace and instant messaging or in face-to-face contacts, we thought there would be a really high overlap between those people and we didn’t find that. We also found that they weren’t engaging in risky behaviors. so they were connecting with friends, they were sharing updates about themselves, they were reading updates about other people, they weren’t seeking out people, they weren’t poking or winking or flirting or doing those things that the media seems to be concerned that they are. And so what we really see are teens have multi-faceted relationships and they use platforms to connect socially to people and different ways. Intimacy and social connection is a very important developmental need for this age group and that’s how they're using the social media.
History
The rise of the World Wide Web resulted in an expansion of the varieties of methods for communication on the Internet, much of which was limited in the 1980s to discussion in newsgroups, BBS and chat rooms.[1] While the initial rise of web-based mass communication took place in the form of early Internet forums in the mid-1990s, a few services such as MSN Groups, Yahoo! Groups and eGroups pioneered the combination of web-based mailing list archives with user profiles; by 2000, such services doubled as full-fledged mailing lists and Internet forums, allowing users to create an extremely large variety of discussion and networking mediums with comparatively sparse thresholds of complexity. Further features included chat rooms (often Java-based), image and video galleries, and group calendars.
The second spurt of bullecalbel networking, one which was less dependent upon mailing list-related features and more upon Internet forum features, began in the early- to mid-2000s in the form of such services as LiveJournal, Friendster, MySpace and Facebook. These services continued the evolution of the web-based e-group as a discussion and organization medium. In the late 2000s, services such as Yammer and Micromobs further advanced e-group communication by taking advantage of microblog-style activity streams.[2]
In virtual worlds
In Second Life, groups are centered less around discussion forums (as such, an asynchronous conferencing feature is not built into the Second Life network as of 2009) and common interest, and are more centered on maintenance of a particular geographic location inside the network. Such groups are often created by the owners of areas such as buildings, plots of land or whole islands in order to cater to the most frequent visitors and patrons of the regions. With the limited asynchronous messaging capability of Second Life, groups are also a means of mass-emailing announcements pertinent to the group, but are not completely capable of hosting discussion or deliberation of such announcement messages.
The importance of online social networking groups
Before people expanded their social life to the internet, they had small circles. These included the networks gained from rural areas or villages, such as family, friends and neighbors, and community groups such as churches. These networks represented a social safety net to support individuals.[3]
Since we have moved a huge part of our social life to the internet, online social networking groups have become a way to maintain a structure in social life. Online networking is made up by clusters of people, bounding themselves together on the World Wide Web.[4] To be able to sort out the many different clusters we belong to we use online groups to helps us arrange and make sense of all our contacts. This sense-making is rooted within us, we sort and put people into compartments or sort by categories to make sense and try to understand our relationships to the people around us. Online social networking groups therefore enables us to do the same thing online.[5] Online social networks have a huge impact on people’s lives. Since the social network revolution has offered people with more loose ties and diversity in their relationships, it creates both stress and opportunities. Furthermore, the Internet revolution has transformed the contact point from a household to the individual. In addition, people are in constant communication with each other due to the mobile revolution. All in all, the mentioned revolutions created a new social operating system: "networked individualism". The way that people currently connect, communicate and exchange information can be described as a form of operating system because of the similarities between the structure of computer systems and the networked individualism that has taken form in society. These structures consist of unwritten rules, norms, constraints and opportunities which are apparent for those who are part of a specific network.[3]
Concerns
There is some research claiming that fake news is infiltrating online social networking. A recent study claimed that people exposed to fake news generally revert to their original opinion even after finding out the information they were given was false.[6]
See also
References
- ^ "A Brief History of the Internet". Internet Society. Retrieved 2023-08-14.
- ^ "Forget Emails, MicroMobs Takes Group Messaging Out of Your Inbox" - Services such as micromobs offer an e-mail alternative for e-group communication. NY Times website. Retrieved on July 13, 2010.
- ^ a b Rainie, Lee; Wellman, Barry (2012-04-27). Networked: The New Social Operating System. MIT Press. ISBN 9780262300407.
- ^ Keersmaecker, Jonas De, and Arne Roets. "Fake News Incorrect, but Hard to Correct. The Role of Cognitive Ability on the Impact of False Information on Social Impressions." Intelligence, vol. 65, 2017, pp. 107–110., doi:10.1016/j.intell.2017.10.005.
This page was last edited on 23 November 2023, at 13:20