35 Different Ways of Looking at Social Networks

jg21 writes "Social Computing Magazine has just published a list of thirty-five perspectives on online social networking reflecting how protean and difficult to pin down the phenomenon is. It was compiled by Malene Charlotte Larsen, a PhD student at Aalborg University in Denmark, who has been doing research on Danish youngsters and online social networking. She ends with an open request for further perspectives."

35 perspectives is bit too much!

THIRTY FIVE Perspectives on Social Networking?

Dash it, All I can come up with is but one: Sex.

Re:

35 was necesary so that no group, race,gender, color, programming lanuage, etc would be left out. She ask for more because in her heart she is sure that she has unconsciously discriminated against somebody.

Re:35 perspectives is bit too much!

You forgot about the other perspective. The one who simply don't give a fuck about Social Networking sites.

So theres 2 perspectives: Sex and those who can get laid without them

Re:

You both forgot the biggest one of all, MONEY.... for those who can exploit humanities desire to network... and for those who can actually get something useful out of these vast clouds of vague relationships without purpose.

Re:

While there certainly are social networks with strong sexual overtones, http://www.mocospace.com/ [mocospace.com] for example, I don't think sex explains the success of a site like http://www.linkedin.com/ [linkedin.com].

Re:

Dash it, All I can come up with is but one: Sex.

I found it to be kinda short sighted in the article that they would seperate the "sex" perspective from the "youth" and "identity" perspectives. Of course teens are going to have all sorts of pictures of

The complete and utter shite perspective

Sums it up I think.

The "surveillance perspective" - how true!

Looking through TFA, looks like the list of alternative 'takes' ranges from the idealistic ("The love perspective") to the realistic ("The generation gap perspective") to the distinctly disquieting ("The bullying perspective"). It's still a work in progres

Re:The "surveillance perspective" - how true!

Yes there are several articles about this aspect, the Law of Unintended Consequences in all its glory. For example "Indiscreet Photos on Social Networking Sites Can Hurt Career, Warns Expert" [socialcomp...gazine.com]. Although that cuts both ways of course: "Jobseekers Doing Online Background Checks On Employers, Too" [techdirt.com].

Re:

At least it seems I'm not alone in my ignorance. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/%20protean [reference.com]d ictionary.com

35 MADLIBS

In any case, mapping out the different perspectives has been a good exercise for me as a researcher.

I'm glad you had fun. 35 Perspectives on anything is really boring for me as a reader. You basically cut and pasted "The _______ Perspective: Social Networking is really _______" and filled in the blanks with 35 random words. Are you a researcher of MADLI

Re:35 MADLIBS

Are you a researcher of MADLIBS?

I resent your SMELLY accusation, as I have been FARTING my research for over ELEVENTEEN years now. Just because you're bored by POOP doesn't mean this research won't help FLYING MIDGETS in the long run.

Re:

It's more than I would have managed.

1) Sad, lonely bedrooms boys (and girls, in some cases, I guess) trying to get laid.
2) Sad, lonely bedrooms boys (and girls, in some cases, I guess) trying to get laid.
3) Sad, lonely bedrooms boys (and girls, in some cas

Re:

I take it you will not enjoy my list of 50 ways to leave the lover you found on a social networking site.

It could be worse

It may not be the most interesting article I've ever read, but at least it's not about the iPhone.

The Perspective's Perspective perspective

I think this is a simplistic approach to Online Social Networking.
The plea in the end to contribute more perspectives just stresses that.
There are as many perspectives as people involved in (online or offline) social networking.
IMHO the only insight I can contribute is that networking is a human trait that we carry to every medium we use to communicate with.
When you contribute to a network you get more than what you put in.
I think an analysis of peer-to-peer networking, with contributors, leechers, etc. would show the dynamics very clearly and that could be extrapolated to a lot of human networking activities, i.e.: The economy.

Well, this is MY rambling contribution to this topic anyway.

I find the repetition of the word "perspective" in the article deeply annoying. :P

35 Different Ways of Looking at Social Networks

35 Different Ways of Looking at Social Networks, and every one starts and ends with 'Join my friends list! Lolz!

-Grey [wellingtongrey.net]

Riiight

6. The paedophile and predator perspective
Social networking sites are an El Dorado for paedophiles and predators who want to harm young people. The people behind the sites are not in control of safety and do not put enough effort into keeping predators out of the sites.

Let's blame "The people behind the sites" and not:
A) Kids who sneak away to meet predators
B) Parents who aren't paying attention
C) Online predators for their behavior
D) Parole officers for not keeping tabs on sex offenders

Do any of those alternative sources of blame sound reasonable?

Re:

Do any of those alternative sources of blame sound reasonable?

Yes, but which sounds the most profitable? The parents wont sue themselves or the kids, and the predators don't have money, so obviously its the sites fault

Re:

6. The paedophile and predator perspective
Catholic churches are an El Dorado for paedophiles and predators who want to harm young people. The people behind the churches are not in control of safety and do not put enough effort into keeping predators out

Re:

Catholic churches are an El Dorado for paedophiles and predators who want to harm young people.

My opinion is that that it's more to the point to say that the Catholic priesthood and monastic orders are a haven for sexually aberrant and dysfunctional individuals. IMHO only someone who has major issues with their own sexuality is going to voluntaril

Re:Riiight, silly boy and

Animats,

I agree, "Catholic churches are an El Dorado for pedophiles and predators."

Also, I know from friends back 30 years ago the Methodist, Jewish, Islam, Baptist, Lutheran, Mormon ... "are an El Dorado for pedophiles and predators." Parents need to be a

Re:

Could anyone explain to me how are online social networks any different, legally, to cell phone networks, email providers or even the postal system when it comes to pedophilia? Aren't they simply providing communication services? Aren't all of those used b

Re:

For the most part, no, that's a bad argument:

A) Kids who sneak away to meet predators

Any adult with a profit motive who absolves themselves of responsibility and blames it on a horny 13-year old is being an arsehole.

B) Parents who aren't paying att

Pedophilia again... Sheesh!

It would be a good idea for wishful-thinking Scandinavian feminist PhD types to finally let go of the idea that pedophilia is a one-way street or that all sex is rape initiated by a male offender.

I should know: ages ago, I was one of those kids who was t

worthless trivia

No information about where these "perspectives" came from. It's impossible to determine the authorativeness of these statements. I'm certain if you took a different 35 people, you'd get 35 more perspectives, so it's totally irreproducible and therefore not

Re:

Would any other "social interaction scientists" come up with some better information? I am at least sure these 35 are what the mainstream would conclude. Almost nothing outside of physics and mathematics is authorative.

Re:

Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] claims that "The first social networking website was Classmates.com, which began in 1995" - I wonder whether Slashdotters agree, or is there prior art? (SixDegrees.com didn't begin till 1997.)

Re:

The WELL, USENET, BBS's...Though I think you're best off citing the first non hardcore nerd source, which probably makes your quote relevant.

Re:

Certainly The WELL [well.com] predates even AOL, since Stewart Brand and Larry Brilliant started it in 1985, but USENET would take us even further back, if we agree that it's the prototype for what we now call a social network.

When Tom Truscott and Jim Ellis create

Re:

Slashdot wasn't registered, I believe, till Nov 1996. I was thinking more along the lines perhaps of the first site being AOL's 1998 launch, with its notions of public buddy profiles that were discoverable by interest. There's a great timwline wiki here [pbwiki.com] bt

Re:

Oops, for AOL I meant to type 1988 of course. my bad.

One answer

People are a social animal (well most people...). Places like myspace and facebook let people expllore the social structure- and create a forum for gossip that was a written record. :)

the real story is

that publicity and society genericize us online social networking sites magnify this effect, combining the effects of advertising, options, and networking to create a population homogenized to fit the standards of the site

we create ourselves based on rel

35 Different Ways ...

... to say we're making it up as we go along.