The Net and Everyday Life
We have explored media and societal institutions throughout this course, and ‘community’ constitutes the basic and essential unit of those societal institutions. Community, not as the aggregation of members, but as network, necessitates means of communication (technology). Changes in tools of communication become the main focus of community scholars since the changes implicate, in most cases, the transformation of community. Now, we are witnessing the growing power of the Internet, which have brought about hopes and fears simultaneously (Wellman). The speculation on the Internet and community can create more fruitful outcomes when the question is concretized at the level of everyday life. Thus, the departing point is “the Net and everyday life.”
“The reality of the Internet is more important than the dazzle” (Wellman et. al., 5). This point signifies one desirable methodological direction of the Internet research. Social Implications of the Internet, an overview (or meta-research) of the "reality of the Internet", shows the wide spectrum of the Internet research that covers manifold domains of social life to which the Internet has been incorporated. Wellman and Haythornthwaite point out researches on the Internet and everyday life indicate that “the Internet has continued this turn towards living in networks, rather than in groups” (33). This echoes the Manuel Castells’ perspective that considers the Internet as technology that strengthens the existing tendency of “networked individualism.” This line of arguments regards the impact of the Internet on society as concomitant to the ongoing changes in sociability, so that it considers the effect of the Internet as limited. Craig Calhoun exactly stands on this position: “The Internet is thus a very useful tool, but the strength of these movements still lies largely in their local roots” (382). In other words, in order for the Internet to exert the maximum power, it necessitates very complex preconditions.
More to the point of our class, Wellman raises a notable argument: “The personalization, portability, ubiquitous connectivity, and imminent wireless mobility of the Internet all facilitate networked individualism as the basis of community. It is the individual, and neither the household nor the group that is becoming the primary unit of connectivity…It is I-alone that is reachable wherever I am…The person has become the portal” (34). If the fundamental unit of relationship has significantly changed (“I” as the portal), thus the mode of networking in community has been substantially transformed, the old paradigm that defines community should be revised. To do this, the very old paradigm must be identified first and foremost. Based on this, a new paradigm of community definition can be created which overcomes the dichotomy between direct/indirect relationships.
“The reality of the Internet is more important than the dazzle” (Wellman et. al., 5). This point signifies one desirable methodological direction of the Internet research. Social Implications of the Internet, an overview (or meta-research) of the "reality of the Internet", shows the wide spectrum of the Internet research that covers manifold domains of social life to which the Internet has been incorporated. Wellman and Haythornthwaite point out researches on the Internet and everyday life indicate that “the Internet has continued this turn towards living in networks, rather than in groups” (33). This echoes the Manuel Castells’ perspective that considers the Internet as technology that strengthens the existing tendency of “networked individualism.” This line of arguments regards the impact of the Internet on society as concomitant to the ongoing changes in sociability, so that it considers the effect of the Internet as limited. Craig Calhoun exactly stands on this position: “The Internet is thus a very useful tool, but the strength of these movements still lies largely in their local roots” (382). In other words, in order for the Internet to exert the maximum power, it necessitates very complex preconditions.
More to the point of our class, Wellman raises a notable argument: “The personalization, portability, ubiquitous connectivity, and imminent wireless mobility of the Internet all facilitate networked individualism as the basis of community. It is the individual, and neither the household nor the group that is becoming the primary unit of connectivity…It is I-alone that is reachable wherever I am…The person has become the portal” (34). If the fundamental unit of relationship has significantly changed (“I” as the portal), thus the mode of networking in community has been substantially transformed, the old paradigm that defines community should be revised. To do this, the very old paradigm must be identified first and foremost. Based on this, a new paradigm of community definition can be created which overcomes the dichotomy between direct/indirect relationships.
posted by Anonymous at
9:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home