Social Side-Effects Of Internet Use 476
venicebeach writes "The World Internet Project has released its third annual report on internet usage. It contains few surprises, but lots of interesing stats - for example the most experienced internet users spend an average of 15.8 hours online per week. CNN is running a story on the social findings - "New study shatters Internet 'geek' image." Apparently they are suprised to hear that internet users are more social than non-users: internet users watch less television, read more books and engage in more social activities."
Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
-bs
Uh Oh... (Score:5, Insightful)
is this so surprising? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of my friends who can be found sitting behind their computer all day watch little to no television, and spend a great deal of their time reading (I personally find e-books easier to read than real books, and do so often.) I would say the internet is a far better medium to immerse yourself in than television or radio.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
I organize lots of outings with my friends through e-mail. Isn't that being social?
In my case... (Score:2, Insightful)
internet users watch less television
read more books
and engage in more social activities.
"Book-reading" social activity? (Score:3, Insightful)
meh...I don't like the outside world... (Score:5, Insightful)
I read books often (1 every month or so)
I only "go out" on weekends
I spend the majority of my time at work chatting online and surfing the net, then I come home and play FFXI.
Why should I go outside? I get hay fever or cold or could get in an accident. It's not warm enough to use the pool yet, and the jacuzzi is nice, but I get cold when I get out.
I think i'll just stay in and continue my life.
Re:Not surprised. (Score:5, Insightful)
Although I consider my self to be fairly competent when it comes to conducting myself socially IRL, when it comes to meaningful discussions the net is the way to go - even when I am talking to people I know IRL.
From my observation, the biggest reason your confidence gets boosted when on the net is because you don't have to worry about the person's initial reaction - i.e. you don't see facial expressions, hand movements, etc. Thus, you are not continuously evaluating your "speech" to see if they care. That leaves a lot more room for confidence and attention to what you do mean to say.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not surprised. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Thankfully, the internet came along to provide a dissenting fracture to the TV as life/life as TV spiral. The internet encourages interaction between people. The internet makes diversity within society easier to accomplish, while at the same time providing a common ground that can bring people together. As the next step in our culture's social model, the internet is a positive step forward.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:3, Insightful)
...unless you have been using that time chatting on IRC.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering that the average American watches four hours of television per day
What's really crazy about those four hours is that 45 minutes of it is probably commercials!! I'm not sure if that's accurate or not, but the commercials are the entire reason why I don't watch television anymore (well, except for hockey games of course).
Is is adjusted for SES ? (Score:5, Insightful)
The article is not clear about it, but I would guess they did not adjust for Socio-Economic Segments (SES). SES would reflect mainly an individual's income and education level.
Internet usage of course begun in the higher SES levels (having started mainly in the academic world) -- and has ever since penetrated more the top levels than the bottom ones (this has in turn given risen to the term digital divide [wikipedia.org]). On the other hand, guess which SES reads more books and has a richer social experience ?
Re:15.8hrs/week! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:"Book-reading" social activity? (Score:3, Insightful)
Book reading as a social event:
Read a book. Tell your friends what you thought of it and if they should or should not read it. Once they read it, or even while they havn't finished it yet, discuss the book. I have a book I read a few months ago. I finished it and passed it along to a friend. Each of her parents read it, and her friend and mother read it as well. We've talked about it a lot of random times.
In the event that you don't have any book reading friends, find a book club or hang out at a bookstore. Books can be catalysts for socializing.
Less G. W. Bush == More Democracy (+1, Patriotic) (Score:1, Insightful)
G. W. Bush's [gwbush.org] ears.
Thanks in advance,
Kilgore Trout
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Watching television does not reduce the sociability of a person. It can teach them how to be a reponsible citizen. I'd rather my child be in front of a TV watching Caillou than being social with the other kids while chucking rocks at the Mexican kids.
No, it is not coincidence that the television shows I listed are on PBS
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't count how many times I have tried to call a friend and been told to call after show X is finished.
Or people who don't want to go to the bar because they need to see Show Y.
People really do plan their lives around TV, it is very sad.
Re:Not surprised. (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, this also creates a much larger problem, the issue of authenticity of the interaction from the ground up. In reality, we all use those conversational elements such as vocal tone, facial expressions and body language to judge the credibility of the communication, and how true it is, because this is the only character information you can gather from them at the time (apart from the actual conversation), coming from the individual. Of course, both of these scenarios would apply best to someone you're meeting for the first time, if it's someone you know, the process for calculating the credibility of what you're hearing becomes much more complicated; variables such as how long you've known the person, if they lie a lot etc, come into play.
While the internet has made it much easier to interact and meet new people by shedding the stigmas of the social world, it also provides a much better mental rock to hide behind when wanting to swindle or mislead individuals in any case.
Re:Not surprised. (Score:4, Insightful)
Books are not by default better than TV (Score:5, Insightful)
I get so tired of this assumption that just because a person reads a lot, they are automatically more intelligent. I happen to read quite a bit, but I know people who spend way more time than most people watching TV, yet are very intelligent. Specifically, I know of a college professor that could out debate anyone on Crossfire, and does nothing all evening but watch History and PBS.
Also, what's with the assumption that any reading material is automatically more valuable than any television show? I can learn more watching 30 minutes of TLC, Discovery, A&E, Biography, History Channel, or PBS than I can in spending three hours reading whatever trash Oprah is recommending this week. I do agree that reading increases vocabulary, but I would also argue that television is much more conducive to other areas of learning, as it delivers its message via sight and sound.
As for the social aspect, many of us are forced into social situations all day long. We do not need to spend our times outside of the office, carpool, school, college, whatever to increase our social skills. However, we do need "alone time" so that we can regroup and prepare for the next day.
Re:Aware of Current Events (Score:2, Insightful)
I used to watch news on TV and read the papers, now I browse most of the time.
I have good knowledge of tech news and important international events, but I find that I'm not really aware of local news anymore. In fact, "local" here means anything from the city to the country (Canada).
The information is available, it's just that I don't really care much...
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:3, Insightful)
Bad statistics? (Probing education level) (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that internet access is correllated to education level. Furthermore a person with a high education will tend to read more books. In other words it is not very surprising if internet users read more books. Similar arguments can be applied to many of the other conclusions in the report.
In conclusion this report does not tell us if internet use changes the life style of a person.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't worry, someone else will teach him to be racist. I learned all about racism in my Baltimore middle school. Our black female Librarian taught all of us that there are only 2 races, black and non-black. (That is right, I learned rasicm from a black woman.) If you are non-black you are a narrow minded racist pig and you have victimized blacks for generations. Regardless of where you or your ancestors were born you enslaved black people and you owe them.
I learned the lessons of the 70s left very well. And, my parents didn't have to teach me. Certainly not the lessons they would have taught me. The personal is political. Even today, I look at a TV commercial and identify the racial/sexual makeup of the ad and determine which group is being made fun of (usually the white male, BTW).
Don't worry even if you don't teach your kids this, someone will come along a teach your kids how to view people as just a demographic to hate or feel sorry for.
Re:In my case... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think "getting together" is one of the key things in determining what is social and what is not. (Though getting together is not in and of itself the sole determining factor. Joining a monastery isn't exactly a social thing.)
But sitting in front of your computer in your underwear for 12 hours a day in an IRC chat room just doesn't seem to qualify as a social thing by the common sense definition of the word. Maybe some people are so completely introverted that they want to believe that IRC is social. I guess that's fine if it works for them. But I miss the days when I would hang out with my friends out in the real world, doing real things away from the computer.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:3, Insightful)
The final straw came when I noticed something. I could switch to another secondary game when mine went to commercial, and then switch back to the primary game when the commercial was over. What was important was that I just 'knew' when the commercials were over - without checking. I realized that my subconcious was counting the 2 or 3 minutes that a "TV Timeout" takes, and was telling me to return just as the fade-in occured. I tested the hypothesis for weeks, and even proved it to my friends.
Then I remembered Pizza Delivery. As a driver, I would oftentimes knock on the door of someone watching TV. If the TV was visible from the door, I would feel the tug of my eyes to glance over at it. While I could control it rather easily - the fact that it was 'calling' to me freaked me out. It has little to do with content though.
Programs go to commercial at given times. While commercials are often even better to view than the shows, there's a stigma attached to commercials as 'garbage'. It seems like a classic example of reward and punishment - regardless, it does condition us. Good or Bad are irrelevant at that point - just the effect was enough for me to kill it.
Parent however, do use TV to occupy their kids. Arguably better than video games. TV is a remarkable medium, and I used to watch PBS religiously. Anymore I think their kinda bland.
Anyway, that's my testimonial: I got rid of TV and
1) went to 65 hours a week at work,
2) took classes,
3) joined a community group
- all at the same time, and still had time to program and surf.
Well Duh! (Score:4, Insightful)
That's because I can find out anything RIGHT now by clickety clicking....rather that sitting in front of my TV and listening to the sound bite commercials from the news channells all night waiting to "find out at 10..."
What does online mean? (Score:4, Insightful)
Does that count as being online 168 hours a week?
If Im working on some programming project for, say a 4 hour streach, and Im flipping back and forth to a browser pointed at some online documentation, does that count as 4 hours online? Or (pulling a number out of my ass) is only 10% of that online?
Or not... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:1, Insightful)
It's just there... (Score:2, Insightful)
Trying to count how long geeks spend online daily would be as stupid as trying to count how long non-geeks spend using electricity each day.
what's "offline"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:shouldn't be TOO surprising (Score:5, Insightful)
At least in the social ciricles of which I am a part , or an observer of, there seems to be a sort or line by which you can divide people into two groups. The first group pride themselves on intelligence, or at least in learning about new things, keeping up with world events, and in general being well rounded people. The other is the group which prides themselves on ignorance, these are the people who are proud that they cannot set the clock on their VCR. It is the former group which I think tends to spend more time online, seeing it as a valuable resource for information and for the communication of ideas in an open forum (be it IRC, newsgroups,
It seems to me that everyone has some amount of time is spent non-socially. It is this time which those intent on learning and the like spend on the net, and those content to live in a happy stupor spend watching TV. Of course the average net user spends less time on the net than the average TV viewer spends watching TV because the net user has more options available to him or her. For those wishing to use their brain as little as possible, the majority of that non-social time can be spent watching tv, movies, and thats about it. For the group who likes to learn and expand their mind however, the choices for that non-social time include being on the internet, reading, drawing, playing music, and a number of other artistic or challenging activities.
causality? (Score:2, Insightful)
apparently the authors are a little confused about causality
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:is this so surprising? (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you realize that you just replaced one stereotype with another. Not everyone wearing thick glasses and/or with no girlfriend is a geek.
Re:Less TV == more social (Score:2, Insightful)