Positive Aspects of Social Networking

Positive Aspects of Social Networking
Connection and Access
The primary function of social networking sites is to provide ways for an individual to make
connections with others. Some common connections include (but are by no means limited to):
Sharing interests and goals with current friends
Maintaining contact with friends in different cities, states, and even countries.
Finding old friends and former classmates
Furthering professional development
Debating or advocating for political, environmental, ethical, and religious issues
Different social networking sites fill one or more niches to promote connection. For
example, LinkedIn promotes professional development and SparkPeople creates a community
dedicated to healthy living; furthermore, a site like Ning allows members to create user-designed
social networks based on varying topics of interest. These sites can be a way for individuals to
connect with people that they may not have had access to before. In the context of education, social
networking sites offer a student the opportunity to network with other students, educators,
administrators, alumni, both within and outside his current institution. Further Skype can be used for
online classes.


Challenges of Social Networking Sites Edit
While we support social networking sites as valid resources for students, educators and
administrators, we must acknowledge that social networking, as is the case with most technology,
comes as a mixed blessing. Being cognizant of the challenges social networking sites raise is
important in evaluating how best to educate students to use sites appropriately.

Privacy
Facebook, the archetypal social networking website, is now open to anyone with an email address
and draws people of every age, ethnicity, income level, and academic background. According to the
company's website, as of 2009, there are over 200 million individuals with Facebook accounts, and
half log in to the site at least once a day. With so many users, it is no surprise that the primary
concerns of many users relate to privacy issues. In a January 2008 interview with Barbara Walters
Mark Zuckerberg (one of the creators of Facebook) stated, “the money to pay the four hundred
Facebook employees has to come from somewhere.” He was defending the use personal
information presented by members of Facebook for data analysis, marketing, and creating
endorsement ads. On personal profiles, Facebook users voluntarily list personal details from the
more mundane (favorite TV shows) to the more (address, phone number, etc.). How private is the
information that users place on sites like Facebook? Who has access to the information and what is
it used for? [6] Whose role is it- parent, student, educator, website developer- to ensure an
individual understands his right to privacy and exercises it accordingly?
The dark side of social media is forcing many school districts to keep Facebook, Twitter and
YouTube at arm’s length while they consider strategies on how to best use social networks in classes
while keeping students safe. But local education officials are also aware that the same students are
probably using social media at home or on their smartphones while out with friends.
Although much of the information individuals supply on social networking sites is voluntary, users
(especially younger students) are increasingly more comfortable with revealing a great deal of
personal information online. Emma Justice discussed the potential problem of overexposure in her
article about Facebook 'suicide'- disabling accounts permanently- commenting, "The fact that you
can't see or hear other people makes it easier to reveal yourself in a way you might not be
comfortable with. You become less conscious of the individuals involved (including yourself), less
inhibited, less embarrassed and less concerned about how you will be evaluated."[7] Many found
the only way to regain their sense of having a truly private life was to log off and disconnect entirely.

Real Friendship?

Thanks to social networking sites, an individual may now be able to boast that her friends number in
the hundreds. But the quality and integrity of these friendships is not always what society is used
to[8]. Social networking sites have spawned articles addressing the different opportunities for online
friendship[9] and the value of these friendships.[10] A 2009 advertising campaign from Burger King
offered Facebook users a free hamburger if they 'unfriended' ten of the users on their friends list
(the unlucky 'nonfriends' were unceremoniously sent an email that informed them they'd been
removed so that their former friend could get a free lunch).[11] When a student has 200+ online
friends, what is the value of each individual friendship?
In more extreme cases, instances of cyber-bullying by other students (and even parents) have drawn
media attention to the problems of instantaneous and/or anonymous communication .[12] Most
parents are concerned about online predators; what many don't realize is how readily social
networking sites allow for cyber-stalking and unwanted communication to occur.[13] Voluntarily-
provided data is not always 100% honest and reliable, and social networking sites do not verify
personal details (age, location, etc.) of their members. While sites provide an opportunity for
individuals to present a positive and accurate self image, there is equal potential to abuse this
openness

In the end, some even posit that having a large number of friends/acquaintances on social
networking sites may do more harm than good. Patricia Rogers, a counselor and fellow of the BACP,
worries, "It could be incredibly damaging for the ego to realize that you haven't got as many friends
as you thought you had, or that those friends aren't particularly meaningful. Comparing yourself
with others, a big preoccupation on sites such as Facebook, can be damaging
psychologically."[14] Having hundreds of relatively superficial , and occasionally completely
disingenuous, friendships is becoming the norm for social networkers. On developing an online
presence, Phillip Hodson, a fellow of the British Association for Counseling and Psychotherapy
(BACP), remarked, "This can lead to disappointment once people realize how insignificant their
online existence really is. Not only are online friends not necessarily real friends, they can turn out to
be people you don't wish to know at all."[15]

Taking Up Time
There is little question that as more opportunities to connect (more applications, more niche sites)
increase, social networking is taking up more of our time. According to Facebook, users spend
approximately 5 billion minutes a day on the site[16], although a survey by the British price-
comparison Web site uSwitch.com found that some Brits spend more than 10 hours a week on
social-networking sites, the equivalent of 24 days a year.[17] Logging on daily is not compulsory, but
some studies suggest that these sites may be addictive.[18]
If an individual makes the choice, as some have, to disconnect and deactivate his accounts, actually
getting rid of personal information will prove harder than it seems. Many sites, like Facebook, keep
posted information in their database and users find that their digital footprint lingers longer than
their actual presence.[19][20]

Miscommunication
Issues of honesty aside, when individuals cannot communicate in person, misunderstandings can
occur much more frequently. Whereas interacting face-to-face allows individuals to perceive
physical clues like tone, inflection, body language, in an online environment, these are lacking. As
Carolyn Axtell points out, "You can write something flippantly, which others take seriously, or come
across as aggressive when that's not your intention at all."[21] Communicating across cultures and
language barriers can prove next to impossible without physical interaction, and important
messages may be improperly relayed. The disparity in communication styles can exacerbate
relationship tensions between parents and young adults, the latter being so attuned to virtual
communication that reaching them in-person proves difficult.

The Effects of Social Networking on Informal and Formal Education Edit
Keeping both the challenges and opportunities of social networking sites in mind, we turn our
attention to how these relate to the formal and informal educational spaces that students inhabit.
Knowledge: Type and Access Edit
Collaboration
With the unprecedented possibility to interact and connect on a non-physical level, individuals now
have the ability to collaborate and develop without worrying about physical boundaries of time or
space. This newly enabled collaborative knowledge is challenging the authoritarian model of
knowledge. While knowledge used to be the domain of experts, it has now been handed over to
anyone with access to the Internet. The increase in participation in the creation of knowledge has
had positive impacts on formal and
informal education. For instance, the publishing world has traditionally been exclusive and slow.
Decisions of relevance, verifiability and authenticity had been previously left in the hands of a select
group of “experts.” As a result, many individuals with valuable contributions have been … ‘“shut out”
of the traditional publishing world, like talented K-12 teachers, community college instructors,
scientists and engineers out in industry, and the world majority who do not read and write English."
(Baraniuk 2008). In addition, with traditional publishing, topics are frequently out of date by the time
they reach their target audience. This is especially true in rapidly evolving disciplines such as science
and technology. Not only are traditional paper books slow to produce, they are costly due to the raw
materials consumed in their production.
In Challenges and Opportunities for the Open Education Movement: A Connexions Case Study,
Baraniuk (2008) highlights the opportunities presented by the Connexions website. This site allows
individuals to upload self-produced modules of information, and allows the public to access these
modules. Connexions is a pertinent example of both social networking and its final product-
community generated information. The site increases a learner’s access to valuable knowledge,
knowledge that may have otherwise been inaccessible to them.
Access to Creating and Distributing Knowledge
The Connexions model decreases the lag time in the publishing of information, thus keeping it
current. The cost of access is limited to the cost of Internet. Internet access, while still a legitimate
challenge for some, is much less restrictive than costly textbooks. In formal educational institutes,
such as a public middle school for example, teachers often lack adequate textbooks for students to
each have their own copy (Baraniuk 2008). ]By eliminating the high overhead costs associated with
traditional publishing, it is plausible that the cost of formal education should decrease. Socially
networked self-educating communities, as well as inquisitive individuals, also have in creased access
to information through sites such as Connexions.
The authoritarian model of knowledge relies on input from an admittedly narrow slice of the
population. Authority has traditionally been held by affluent, educated, male, Caucasians, the cliché
of powerful, old, white men. Socially networked sites diversify the voice of knowledge. Minorities,
who have not traditionally had the social, political or family connections to break into the publishing
world, can now easily have their voice heard. Anyone can start a blog, or contribute to educational
websites such as Connexions. The anonymity associated with many social networking sites also lends
individuals the ability not to be preemptively judged based on factors such as race.
Quality Control Edit
The production of collaborative knowledge is not without challenges. Andrew Keen, author of The
Cult of the Amateur, contends that “… history has proven that the crowd is not often very wise,”
embracing unwise ideas like “slavery, infanticide, George W. Bush’s war in Iraq, Britney Spears.”’
While the last two items may be more subjective, the idea that popular does not always equal
correct, is valid. Keen notes that, “…it’s easy for misinformation and rumors to proliferate in
cyberspace.” (Kakutani 2007) Indeed, as Professor Nicholas Burbules points out, self-educating
communities tend to be highly self-referential (Burbules 2000). It is therefore easy for these
communities to become echo-chambers, be it for truth, or the perpetuation of
misinformation. Filtering for reliable, quality information is challenging when the quantity of
information is vast. New York times book reviewer Michiko Kakutani, who reviewed The Cult of the
Amateur, concedes that “… the online encyclopedia Wikipedia (which relies upon volunteer editors
and contributors) gets way more traffic than the Web site run by Encyclopedia Britannica (which
relies upon experts and scholars), even though the interactive format employed by Wikipedia opens
it to postings that are inaccurate, unverified, even downright fraudulent” (Kakutani 2007). What
Kakutani does not mention is that Encyclopedia Britannica is not free, and users must pay to
subscribe to the service. He drives his point of unreliability home by citing an example where a
Wikipedia contributor who had edited thousands of articles was a 24-year-old man, and not the
professor he claimed. While the level of deception associated with the man’s fraudulent identity is
unsettling, does it really hamper his ability to contribute valuable, accurate knowledge? It could be
argued that deception regarding parts of one’s identity happens frequently in the social realm.
The need for quality control filters has been recognized almost from the inception of Web 2.0.
Connexions, with its eye on providing quality educational information, has aimed to address the
issue head on. Connexions has developed what it refers to as quality lenses.[23] “Each lens has a
different focus. Examples include lenses controlled by traditional editorial boards, professional
societies, or informal groups of colleagues as well as automated lenses based on popularity, the
amount of (re)use, the number of incoming links, or other metrics." (Baraniuk 2007).
Subjective and False Knowledge
In forums such as blogs, its important for the reader to remain aware of the subjective nature of the
content. In forums such as Wikipedia, the community is self-correcting. It does not have a hard and
fast quality filter, but aims to regulate it’s content through a code of conduct. Wikipedia requests the
following in the formation of its entries; “Avoid conflicts of interest, personal attacks and sweeping
generalizations. Find consensus, avoid edit wars, follow the three-revert rule, and remember that
there are 2,925,880 articles on the English Wikipedia to work on and discuss. Act in good faith, never
disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, and assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and
welcoming.” (Wikipedia) While these codes of conduct do not ensure complete accuracy, the social
experiment of sharing and generating knowledge seems to be going surprising well. It is fair to say
that students, both formal and informal, may find it a challenge to decipher what information on
social networking sites is legitimate. Students may believe that because it is on the Internet, it is
valid. This is especially challenging with younger students, though interestingly enough, an Israeli
study found that occasionally, younger users were more inclined to be the ones leaking deceptive
information. (Caspi, Gorsky). Cornell University is one of many educational institutes that provide its
students with an overview of criteria that helps determine a website’s validity.[24] More institutions
need to incorporate this type of digital literacy education if their students are to accurately interpret
and critique online information.
Specifically in reference to an informal social networking setting, the issue of legitimate information
is a particularly hot topic. Due to the anonymity afforded by many social networking sites, there is a
lack of personal accountability for one’s actions. There are opportunities for personal deception that
cannot be accomplished in face-to-face interaction. “Since it's easier to have contact *online+, people
may develop trust more rapidly than they would in the off-line world," says Ron Teixeira, executive
director of the U.S.-based National Cyber Security Alliance. "The more connected people are, the
better chance fraudsters have of reaching out" (Lunau, 2008). The odd fact is that most users of
these social networking sites are fully aware that many of the people, or “friends”, are being
dishonest in their personal disclosure. An online survey conducted in November of 2007 yielded that
61% of the population answered “no” when asked “Do you think Myspace and Facebook users'
profiles are honest reflections of who they are?” (Wheaton, 2007).
Social networking redefines opportunities for plagiarism. With the vast array of resources available,
and the challenge of discerning legitimate information, students have more opportunity than ever to
slid e down the slippery slope of plagiarism. Students have access to so many online opinions; the
options to pass off thoughts as one’s own are endless. It is impossible for a teacher to be current on
every blog and idea out there for the grabbing. In addition, while it is not plagiarism in the strict
sense of the word, informal sources of information such as blogs do not guarantee any level of
accurate referencing. Ultimately, a student may intentionally or unintentionally use information that
has less than clear origins. “Jonathan Bailey, the author of Plagiarism Today, a blog dedicated to the
issue of plagiarism online, said this type of cut-and-paste plagiarism is widespread. (Welch 2006)
Self Education and Anonymity
Social networking has led to the development of “self educating” communities. People are able to
converse with others who share the same interests as themselves. These sites are usually based
around a singular topic. People can discuss their problems and ideas regarding these topics and they
can gain information from other peoples’ knowledge. According to Nicholas Burbules, “Their (self-
educating communities) most striking features… is an overt commitment to sharing information,
initiating newcomers, and extending their collective knowledge through such processes as shared
problem-solving, experimentation, and independent inquiry” (Burbules 1) For example, Pregnancy
Net is a place where expecting parents can go to ask questions and get answers from people who
may have had the same problem and can offer suggestions or solutions. Because these sites are
viewed by so many people, you will not just get one answer to your question, and can interact
further with users who have had relevant experiences.
Another benefit of self educating communities in online social networks is their anonymity. Because
there is no face-to-face contact on these sites, it is easy to be open and honest about the issue you
are discussing, especially if it is personal and perhaps embarrassing. Jacob Palme and Mikael
Berglund argue in their essay titled simply, “Anonymity on the Internet,” that although anonymity in
never 100%, it does offer for people to be more objective in their evaluation of messages and for
people to be more equal towards status, gender, etc. when discussing topics online.[25] While
anonymity, as discussed above, can be a drawback to these networks, in the case of sensitive
information, it can also prove invaluable.
Self educating social networking sites may lack filtering as well as input from true experts. Though
this may seem negative, sometimes people want to seek out information from others that are like
themselves- not experts. This comes from a desire to get information from someone who may have
a less formal or authoritative voice. For example, people can read newspapers or magazines for
restaurant reviews or they can turn to www.yelp.com to view opinions from “real people” who have
written “real reviews.” Of course these reviews can be completely arbitrary, but Yelp, Angie's
List, Epinions, and the myriad similar sites are prospering. These sites’ lack of filtering offers users to
get honest answers and opinions from like-minded people.
Contradictorily, some self educating communities are not equally open for everyone to participate
in. Again, according to Nicholas Burbules, “These communities have well-established norms and
strategies for building their communities. If individuals are not acquainted with these norms and
strategies, or violate them, they may be excluded from the community and the activity of learning
from that community” (Burbules 2000). For fans of the band Phish, there is a fan-created, fan-run
website set up to discuss everything about the band. This site, although extremely informative, is an
example of a self educating community that is not necessarily friendly to everyone. This is not a site
for a novice fan or someone simply trying to learn more about the band.
Anonymity on a site like this can have a negative impact on its users. In Palme and Berglund’s essay
they discuss that anonymity can lead people to speak to others offensively and disruptively[26]. On
the P hish discussion board, you will be ridiculed if you ask basic information about the band or their
history or if you post inaccurate information. Many participants use email addresses or signatures
that shield their name or identity, and this also can create a sense of detachment from personal
obligations of say, being polite or courteous. Because there is a lack of face to face contact, it is
easier for people to be blunt or hyper critical of other participants. The site comes off as elitist to
avid listeners and anyone who is not a “true” Phish fan.
Trust in a Digital World
In addition, expression through social networking, especially in online forums and informal contexts
can not only foster a sense of anonymity but also of trust and intimacy that redefines the boundaries
of traditional relationships of trust. The learning curve of developing appropriate emotional intimacy
with individuals on social networking sites is a high one, especially for vulnerable youth. New Media
and Society performed a study of teens in 2008 in reference to online communities and networks.
“For those focused on identity as display, online risks may arise from their willing, sometimes naïve,
self-display of personal information to a wide circle of contacts, not all of whom are close friends or
sometimes even remembered. For those focused on identity as connection, online risks may arise
from their very confidence that they can know, judge and trust the people with whom they are
intimate" (Livingstone, p. 408).When users of these networks become very comfortable with their
“friends”, they oftentimes feel safe enough to share personal information with them. Users post
their “relationship status”, “religious views”, “hometown”, “addresses”, “phone numbers”, etc. Just
one or two of these in the hands of the wrong person can be extremely harmful. There has recently
been a rise in the risk of identity theft, fraud, and virus attacks for this specific reason (In Study,
2007).REFERENCE
It is interesting to see that this phenomenon of over-disclosure has become an issue among adult
educators as well. A professor from Darmouth updated her profile by mentioning how she accessed
Wikipedia to obtain the information for her lecture the next day. “I feel like such a fraud. Do you
think Dartmouth parents would be upset about paying $40,000 a year for their children to go here if
they knew that certain professors were looking up stuff on Wikipedia and asking for advice from
their Facebook friends on the night before the lecture?” (Young, 2009) Apparently, this professor
was unaware that all users on Facebook were able to read this post. That included her students and
their parents .
On some social networking sites, expertise is not only beneficial, but crucial. Burbules states,
“External expertise is also important because the very virtues of familiarity and shared assumptions
that strengthen a self-educating community internally can also reinforce its blind spots and
prejudices. Misconceptions can cycle endlessly within the group without ever being challenged”
(Burbules 2000). The way information is transmitted on these sites can cause incorrect information
to become widely known as truths. Obviously this could cause many problems particularly on health
related sites. Someone who is seeking information on a particular medication can come across
hundreds of medical self educating sites where people have posted about that particular medicine.
Someone can post about a side effect that they suffered and people can accept that information to
be true for everyone who uses that medication.
Survival of the Most Connected?
People who use social networking sites learn to utilize new technologies such as creating blogs and
websites as well as learning how to upload photos, music, and movies. In the following video from a
researcher at the University of Minnesota, students discuss the benefits they have received from
using MySpace.
Though users may not realize it, they are in fact using technologically advanced skills that will most
likely be beneficial in their education and career particularly if the world is headed in the direction of
the “wiki workplace” described in Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams’ book Wikinomics. Tapscott
and Williams ultimately believe that the world is becoming a place “where only the connected will
survive.” They explain that “peering” – what happens when people collaborate together to create
new ideas – is leading to a new economy where we all need to and can step up and take a leading
role.
People who use social networking sites also gain essential communicative skills. Social networking
sites allow for people to “Learn to engage in dialogic, dynamic inquiry, asking questions, venturing
other viewpoints, offering clarification and supporting evidence, with the goal of deepening
understanding rather than looking for the right answer. Their writing, oral communication and
critical thinking skills all improve” (Monroe 2006). www.vocolo.org is a multimedia website that
allows its users upload audio or text in response to their “Shout Box.” The “Shout Box” has daily
discussion questions that leads to thoughtful responses by users whether by calling in and recording
their argument or typing their response on the forum. Again, these skills will undoubtedly be
beneficial to a person’s education as well as their career whether it be in a traditional work place or
a “wiki work place.”
Not all of the skills acquired by using social networking sites are deemed positive. There is evidence
that the technological skills acquired while social networking can be detrimental to a person. In the
article titled “Social websites harm children's brains: Chilling warning to parents from top
neuroscientist” by David Derbyshire, Derbyshire refers to Oxford University neuroscientist Susan
Greenfield who believes that online networking is “Infantilizing the brain into the state of small
children who are attracted by buzzing noises and bright lights, who have a small attention span and
who live for the moment” (Derbyshire 2009). Although that seems extreme, in the article, teachers
express their concern over the fact students’ attention spans have shortened and students have lost
the skills to participate in classroom settings. Moreover, a recent study has shown that students who
are more involved in social networks feel less involved outside (Nyland, Marvez, & Beck, 2007).
There are arguments that people begin to lack communicative skills from using social networking
sites too much. An obvious example of this is the fact that people often shorten words, use incorrect
spelling, and leave out punctuation to get a message out more quickly. Teachers all too often have
assignments turned that are riddled with common mistakes because students aren’t differentiating
between proper writing and messaging writing. Other communications skills that begin to lack
because of social networking is a person’s inability to read interpersonal communicative cues such as
body language, facial expressions, and tone.