There are many social norms and conventions associated with Facebook (which is essentially the only online space in which I interact with people other than email), but it’s the standards surrounding “Facebook stalking” that stand out the most to me. The most basic rule is that Facebook stalking is socially unacceptable – socially being the key word there. In reality, everyone probably does it (at least when it comes to people we are interested in), we just know enough not to talk about it because that would be inappropriate and creepy. As with most social norms, Facebook users tend to conform to this standard, though there are various exceptions, subtleties, and details associated with the rules that one must learn. From my experience, the conventions go something like this…
In general, one must not admit to Facebook stalking another that he or she does not consider a close friend. It would not be strange to mock my housemate or best friend for adding Hansen to her favorite music yesterday, but it would be strange to do the same to that kid who sits in front of me in Stats class. The standards relax a little when it comes to people with whom you are extremely comfortable, but other than that, you shouldn’t tell acquaintances that you already know all about their weekend because of those photos posted this morning. Along the same lines, you should probably pretend to be surprised when someone tells you all about his interest in sailing – even though you’ve known that for months and have seen all of the pictures too. If you feel comfortable talking, joking or discussing all things Facebook-related and not with a person, then it’s probably alright that you know what their “About me” section says – particularly since you know all about them anyway. The rest of the time, however, it’s best not to mention that your and roommate spent two hours looking at every single post ever written on her “crush’s” wall. Interestingly, many of these inappropriate aspects of Facebook stalking only really become inappropriate when the discussion is moved offline. Hence, commenting on another’s photos, or pointing out a common interest via a wall post might be okay – even if the person is merely an acquaintance – but telling that person these things face-to-face based off what you read on their profile is strictly forbidden.
I think people assume these standards and norms because they are similar to offline social convention. We typically refrain from openly stalking people, and this idea is presumably learned early on in life – otherwise you may be arrested (the law is the Leviathan offline in this case). Obviously, norms become a bit blurred online, and we learn mostly from conforming to other Facebook users, as well as through trial and error. Wallace defines conformity as changing actions, attitudes, and beliefs to match those of a group around you; this leads to acceptance by said group. The Leviathan enforcing Facebook conformity tends to be the social consequences of not conforming. You may be perceived as creepy, strange, or obsessed by breaking Facebook convention. You may even be de”-friended”, or thwart a potential offline friendship. Essentially, the role of the Leviathan rests on the shoulders of conforming Facebook members, and as Wallace notes, most people are willing and eager to conform. In an online space meant to promote friendship and social networking, it makes sense that people would conform in order to avoid ramifications detrimental to these purposes.
Facebook, as an online space, tends to make individual identities salient and people very identifiable. According to SIDE, social influence (which refers to the degree to which members of a group can influence another’s opinions, attitudes, and actions) would not be particularly high or low in these conditions. As such, perhaps knowing and conforming to anti-Facebook stalking norms relates instead to self-presentational goals as outlined by the Hyperpersonal model. Nevertheless, Facebook seems to meet Wallace’s ideas about conformity and the Leviathan. Most people understand that obvious Facebook stalking goes against the norm, and as such has negative social consequences.
comments:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=8276485216823090713
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=7532310520884376725
2 comments:
Kayla, your blog brought up a really interesting phenomenon of the relationship between the online world and the real world. In the “real world”, it’s creepy to admit to someone you stalk their Facebook wall, especially if the most interaction you’ve ever had with them is to friend them in the first place. The Leviathan here seems to be the uncomfortable reactions, like an awkward silence or an uneasy glare, when someone alludes to Facebook stalking as it’s the social norm is not to discuss Facebook in a face-to-face space. This was a great example of conforming to a norm - although, I think it’s interesting to question who created this norm in the first place.
hi Kayla, I really enjoyed reading your blog. Similar to most facebook users, I can agree with you on the socially unacceptability of admitting facebook-stalking acquintances. I've run into awkward situations described in your blog.In this case, does everyone share the role of Leviathan? How do users learn this without implicit directions? I think it's interesting how users share personal information, yet "give a raised eyebrow" when a member in the network acquires that information. Overall, you described the situation well and I liked your example of how "real life" intimacy allows facebook "stalking."
Post a Comment