When communicating in mediated online environments, social norms are understood and maintained as surely as they are in face to face communications. One such set of social norms deal with the interactions of individuals in synchronous chat environments, such as AIM. These rules are enforced by the “leviathan.” This refers to the pressure the online society puts onto each of its members to conform to norms.
One of these social norms is to speak respectfully to other AIM users and not seek to antagonize them with bigotry or profane language. Users have two options they can choose between in order to “raise an eyebrow” at these offenders. They can choose to either block or warn their aggressor.
The decision to block another user acts as a social leviathan. It essentially ends all communication between users. This forces an AIM user to behave in a way in which others will want to communicate with him. If he did not, he would find himself alone in the psychological space, as all other users would block him. Thus, the leviathan forces users to interact politely enough to keep the conversation open.
The decision to warn another user acts as a leviathan as well. Any bigoted or profane comment can be rebuked with a warning. As the warning level of a user builds up, he becomes temporarily unable to send messages. Therefore, the ability to warn other users acts as a social leviathan, preventing offensive comments from being made.
As Wallace states, we are willing to conform to social norms online in order to establish a productive online group environment.
3 comments:
Andrew, I agree with you that AIM has tools which allows for the utilization of the Leviathan. Many times during my middle school years I had to block people in order to prevent creepy stalking and uncalled for comments. I think you chose a straightforward environment, but it would have also been interesting to read about any situations in which you have utilized these tools or known others to do so. I think this would have allowed for you to express what the social norm was to be in the certain context of the situation and how the Leviathan was enacted. This would have given a better picture on how others are willing to conform in order to maintain the social order.
Andrew,
Your post was clear and to the point. You also related everything to Wallace’s ideas about conformity, social norms, and the Leviathan very well. On the other hand, your analysis didn’t really address the fact that AIM users usually know each other in person. Our “buddies” on AIM tend to be buddies in real life. I wonder if this contributes to the social convention of politeness too. A lot of AIM conversations must be considered within a previous relationship context, and the warning and blocking options seem more relevant to meeting new people (which requires knowing or finding their screename). Nonetheless, these options are clearly an example of the “arched eyebrow” and social Leviathan. Good job.
Blocking is a really good example of a social leviathan. It allows people to control who can see their online status and who communicates with them. I remember using blocking a lot more in middle school than I do now, but it does allow people to control who they are having conversations with. Similarly, Facebook created a “blocking method” by allowing you to designate who sees what on your profile. Now when you accept a friend request, it asks if this person can see your limited profile or your entire profile. You can chose to show certain aspects of your profile such as pictures and groups to some people while hiding them from others. In both blocking and Facebook, the user is able to act as the leviathan by controlling who he/she communicates with and who has access to his/her profile.
Post a Comment