Powers in Facebook
Kendall Munro BA1002 Monday 3pm – 4pm
Kendall Munro BA1002 Monday 3pm – 4pm
In recent years, social
networking sites have become a prominent part of individual’s daily lives. For
my blogs from week three through eight I have decided to analyse Facebook. In the
last 3 years, users of Facebook have more than doubled with now 11,150,000,000
members (Ben Foster, 2013) using the site regularly. When I first joined Facebook
in 2009, I didn’t like the experience, I had limited ‘friends’ on my account
and as a result my Facebook profile wasn’t stimulating and I quickly lost
interest. However, as the site’s popularity increased so did my friends list
and I have since become an active member of Facebook.
Petray (2013) mentioned
three types of power in the week two lecture, Dominant; which is enforced by fear
felt by others, competitive; when one envies another, and cooperation; power
shared equally amongst everyone. From my experience with Facebook, it is not
limited to one particular type of power. I believe a social hierarchy is
evident when using Facebook. Although Facebook’s intention is to give all users
a sense of ‘cooperative power’, the amount of ‘following’ individual users can gather
has the ability to give that person a stronger influence over individuals, giving
them a greater feeling of power, and in turn make those with a smaller group of
‘friends’ feel a sense of limited say or support.
The ‘Dominant’ power in Facebook
is given to the site itself; it has the ability to restrict a users privileges
when they do not follow the site’s rules such as spamming other people can
result in having your ‘like’ and ‘comment’ button disabled. The police also
have a ‘Dominant’ power in Facebook; law enforcement becomes a dominant power
when offences such as cyber bullying, nudity, and violent threats arise. I
believe Sherry Turkle (1955) was correct in likening the internet to the
Panopticon, members are unaware of when or if they are monitored when using the
social site, this persuades individuals to behave appropriately. Those with ‘competitive power’ are celebrities,
government figures, and people with an incredibly large following on Facebook (i.e.
Likes on a page or ‘friends’). Individuals with a large variety of ‘friends’
are able to spread their ideas, values and beliefs to a wider community, this
gives them a greater chance at gaining more support and traffic through their profile
and this may cause those with limited ‘friends’ to feel envy, and even awe of
those who have such power. Lastly, those with an average amount of ‘friends’
usually don’t have an extended connection through strangers as their ‘friend’
list is limited to friends, family, colleagues and acquaintances made over
time. The majority of Facebook uses have ‘cooperative power’ although their ‘friends
list’ may slightly vary in size, they all have a shared power over their own
profiles, who they choose to connect with, what and when they choose to post, the
information and images they want to share, but they do not have a great
influence or connection with a large quantity of people.
To some, they may feel
powerless in the Facebook world due to constantly seeing and comparing
themselves to individuals with a large following. I believe this is because the
internet doesn’t give an accurate view and feel of physical space, as mentioned
by Petray (2013) in the week 3 lecture. To Facebook users it may seem limited
and confined to the room they’re sitting in when they’re accessing the site,
but in reality, Facebook is on a much larger scale, with members spread throughout
all different parts of the globe.
Feel free to visit the following site for statistics of current Facebook users world-wide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_statistics
Reference List:
I.
Petray, T.
(2013). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the making of place,
Lecture 2: Power. [Notes] Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au
II.
Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the Screen:
Identity in the age of the internet. New York, USA: Simon & Schuster
Paperbacks.
III.
Petray, T. (2013). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the
making of place, Lecture 2: Power. [Notes] Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au
IV.
Foster, B. (2013). How Many Users on Facebook? Retrieved August 15, 2013 from http://www.benphoster.com/facebook-user-growth-chart-2004-2010/
Image Credit:
I.
Retrieved August 15, 2013 from http://frankmedia.com.au/2013/05/01/social-media-statistics-australia-april-2013/
Hi,
ReplyDeleteI was very interested to read your blog as I am what you may refer to as a Facebook Addict myself.
I agree with your view that Facebook is not simply limited to one type of power, but is a combination of the three types I believe.
As discussed by Allen (2003), power and authority exist only in relation to social interactions and acknowledgement. AS you've mentioned Facebook users, the law and the site itself are allocated power according to how interactions within the site occur. By giving more and more likes and subscribers to the already popular users, we are in effect creating the social hierarchy of Facebook and giving them more power.
I am very interested to continue reading you blog to see if what discoveries you make over the course of the next few weeks.
References:
Allen, J. (2003). Lost geographies of power. Malden, MA.: Blackwell.
Hi,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your view on the different power dominations which can and do occur within the Facebook realm. Having used Facebook for a few years now, I find their are shifts according to what situation has arisen.
I found that when reading Shaw Desmond (1950) and his references to the link between personality and power, that it could be related to Facebook. He stated that each person had within them two different styles and this could be associated with their behaviour.
I very much enjoyed reading your blog and look forward to the next coupe of weeks.
Reference:
Desmond, S. (1950). Personality and Power. Retrieved from http://www.gurdjieff-bibliography.com/Current/f_desmond_person-power_2004-07-04.pdf