I have mentioned previously on this blog that I am engaged in an ongoing, qualitative, Facebook-based project looking at the experiences of social media users. None of the work from this most recent project is yet published, though I did use the data for my TtW2012 presentation. As I move into manuscript preparation, there are several theoretical and empirical trends that I need to flesh out. I hope that readers will indulge me today as I work through one such trend. I especially hope that readers will offer critiques and literature suggestions, as the end product will inevitably be strengthened through collaborative input from this academic community.
Specifically, I hope to flesh out the notion of reality curation. Much of the work on social network sites focuses on self-presentation, or the ways in which people curate images of themselves. These strategies of image-curation include friending practices, selective photographic and textual displays, and careful utilization of privacy settings—among other practices. Users are careful about their self-images, diligent in their upkeep, and protective against identity threats. Undeniably, I see these laborious practices of protection, maintenance, and care in the participants of my study. I also, however, see a second kind of labor; I see a diligent upkeep not only of outgoing data, but also incoming data. In particular, participants report careful curation of their Facebook News Feeds and (when applicable) Twitter networks.
This second type of curation—the curation of data coming in—is empirically and theoretically interesting. Work that focus on self-presentation (data going out) understands social network sites as both window and mirror—spaces for both voyeurism and self-reflection. This implicitly neglects, however, the idea that windows work two ways: they offer a view from outside in, but also a view from inside out. Social network sites, as opposed to non-social websites, are spaces of simultaneous projection, reflection, and, as I argue here, observation by the prosumer of the Profile.
Although self-presentation studies assume that observation takes place (indeed, it is largely for the observing audience that the actor presents hirself), the role of the observing audience is largely relegated to that for which the actor must account in preparing and situating hir performance. In contrast, I focus here on the very active role audiences plays in curating the performances that they “attend.” Or, in other words, the ways in which viewers curate a sense of reality.
In particular, participants in my study show a strong sense of confirmation bias, or seeking out information that confirms what one already thinks. This coincides with research on selective exposure on Blogs and news sites, which show that people largely seek out those information sources that confirm (rather than challenge) existing perceptions and opinions. The affordances of social network sites, however, which facilitate broad and diverse networks that spread information quickly and publicly in a shared space, have the potential to create a melting pot of voices, a true public sphere, a mind-opening mecca of digital bits. Even though we know that social network site users generally connect with those who they know in the offline world, the problem of context collapse suggests that there remains enough diversity within these networks to necessitate exposure to divergent worldviews. Agentic users of these sites, however, actively resist such exposure.
Just as existing studies show that social actors work to eliminate that which threatens their self-concepts, participants in the present study engage in serious labor to eliminate information that threatens their worldviews or “ethos.” These threats come in several forms, and are dealt with in a two-tiered manner.
Thus far, I have seen three main threats to actor’s worldviews: 1) politics, 2) religion, and 3) demeanor. Politics and religion are straight forward. Participants report working to block out political and religious views that contrast with their own, and seek out those with whom their own views coincide. Demeanor is a bit trickier.
By demeanor I refer to a way of being in the world. This often manifests as affective states, humor, and language use. For instance, participants express frustration at those who perpetually display either unfettered joy, or unrelenting despair. It seems that these extreme emotions, perpetually displayed, fail to fit into an affective reality of fairness—where nobody gets to be happy all the time, but nobody has to drown in a pool of their own depression. Participants often roll their eyes when talking about each of these groups, questioning the realness of the displays, complaining of the effect of such displays on their own emotional states, and often, removing those who display perpetual extreme emotion from their field of vision. Similarly, participants complain about those who post content that is of no interest to the viewer, often referring to the way someone “clogs up” their News Feed with unfunny jokes or offensive language and links.
Participants manage these threats in a two-tiered manner. At the base level, participants seek out those connections who confirm their ethos, while eliminating ties to those who threaten it. I refer to this as selective connection. At a more nuanced level, rooted in the social norm of accepting and maintaining particular formal connections, is the elimination of ethos threats from view. I call this selective visibility.
In selective connection, participants report de-friending people on Facebook who post content that contradicts with their religious or political views, or offends their sensibilities of demeanor. Similarly, they report using Twitter to follow political pundits, commercial establishments, and news and entertainment outlets that present information in the bent that dovetails with the participants own preferences. Connections are actively sought, maintained, or severed based on the incoming information that these connections produce.
Selective visibility takes place largely through the “hide” function on Facebook. Social norms dictate that we maintain certain kinds of formal connections. For instance, it would be rude to de-friend your mom and costly to de-friend your boss. Participants manage this norm by simply removing the content of ethos-threatening posters from their News Feeds. The connection remains, but the voice associated with the connection is silenced.
Together, these management strategies work to curate a landscape at which participants are comfortable gazing. And it seems that participants are most comfortable with a confirmatory view. In looking at reality curation, we not only better understand the active role of social media audiences, but also address questions about the expanding versus shrinking nature of our social worlds in the digital era. We can also address the mutually constitutive relationship between technology and reality.
Comments 25
Thomas Wendt — April 30, 2012
I actually might be working on a project in the near future that addresses (or possibly exacerbates) some of these issues. The idea for the product is based on online reputation and personal branding practices, and will assist in the process of filtering both outgoing and incoming data. We're hoping to execute it in such a way that decreases the "echo chamber" effect.
It's a fine line, as I'm sure you're keenly aware, between filtering for relevancy and creating a bubble. Perhaps it's a data and technology problem: users expect the ability to filter massive amounts of data, but the contextually-aware technology that will help keep perspective just doesn't exist yet.
Greg Graham — April 30, 2012
Jenny,
I honestly can't remember if we've talked before (we are tweeps), but I'm certainly interested in your work. I try to keep up with Danah Boyd's work, but haven't heard the term "context collapse" - very interesting.
A couple of things immediately come to mind after reading your post: first, my father. He's my poster child for what I think is meant by "context collapse." Throughout his life he was involved in local politics, business, sports - a classic George Bailey type. Even though he was fairly conservative, he respected and was open to the opinions of everyone. Over the last ten years or so (he's 86), he's become more hardened, close-minded conservative. He's online all the time, but only with people who think like him. Now those who disagree with him are meme's rather than the living beings he interacted with around town in the old days. (I went more into that than I meant to)
Second, are you familiar with the work of Vincent Miller? I think his work would inform your study. Here's a link to his Academia profile: http://kent.academia.edu/VincentMiller
whitney erin boesel — May 1, 2012
Hi Jenny -
I saw (and really enjoyed!) your TtW2012 presentation, and am looking forward to seeing how your project develops.
I have one selective visibility use case to add, which is "breakup management." While for a number of people the end of a romantic relationship automatically means 'de-friending' or even 'blocking' the new ex, in some of my circles (and i'd imagine in some others, as well), de-friending one's ex is seen as an unnecessarily extreme step, one which evidences both immaturity and poor emotion management skills on the part of the 'de-friender'. Leaving the 'Facebook friendship' intact, on the other hand, is seen as a gesture of good faith--one that signifies to one's ex the possibility of "still being friends" in the future, and which demonstrates to one's community that 'breakup drama' will be dealt with quietly, behind closed doors.
Hiding one's 'Facebook friend' ex from one's newsfeed, on the other hand, is fair game; it's a private action that no one else need know about, and most people I know who remain 'Facebook friends' with their exes take this option, at least for a time. The problem with this particular use of "hide" is that Facebook algorithms seem to *love* thwarting this type of selective visibility, by making sure digital traces of one's ex appear anywhere else they can (eg, "name, name, and 57 others like this," etc.; one friend in particular claimed the "recent photos" sidebar on an older Facebook layout was out to get him).
This is all based just on my own observations over the years (call it "recreational ethnography"), and I'm not sure if it fits with what you're looking at under "demeanor"--but what's interesting to me about selective visibility as breakup management is the possibility that 'the ex in the newsfeed' might threaten users' worldviews not by being questionably real, but by being *too* real.
jennydavis — May 1, 2012
Whitney, I remember you from the conference. What a great observation about ex's. I hadn't thought of that (but now that you point it out it seems so obvious!!).
I'm not sure if this goes along with conformation bias, or if there is another mechanism. It certainly pertains to selective visibility. Perhaps I should think about the varied and complex components of selective visibility, as there are numerous motivations for curating profiled viewing.
PJ Patella-Rey — May 2, 2012
Have you thought on how "selective visibility" relates to / differs from Parsier's "filter bubble" thesis?
Behzod Sirjani — May 2, 2012
Jenny,
I really enjoyed this post and the ideas that you are putting forward here. It sounds like you're working through some concepts that directly apply to the experiences that many of us have online.
One aspect of this I wanted to push on a bit is how do we talk about those things that fall outside of our curated reality? If we recognize that we are actively filtering and shaping that which we see, clearly we must be aware that there are things we don't see (or don't want to see, know, hear, etc). This "reality" (even though it may not be ours) should also be talked about, since it is likely much larger than our own reality, even though we may not find it to be significant. (I'm saying this on the premise that "what exists" is far greater than "what I know.")
Is this something you've come across or thought about much? (It's likely you have, since this is just one blog post). If so, I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Cheers,
Behzod
Digital Dualism and Stories of the Real » Cyborgology — May 24, 2012
[...] of others, and of the very world we inhabit — on how social media allows us to essentially “curate reality”, cultivating an environment in which we generally see what we want to see. In the structuralist [...]
Architecture, Normative Structures, and Personal Practices » Cyborgology — June 12, 2012
[...] weeks ago, I wrote a post about how we not only manage our image (outgoing) but also curate our view (incoming). As a very [...]
Desiree — July 1, 2012
Fascinating blog, I enjoyed it immensely and will probably add it to my list of Things to share. My own personal drives are to provide people with as many sides of a story (in this case life in general - tools - communication - information)but after reading this, I can honestly say I will be watching my own postings and actions to guage my own methods of Social Acting. What wonderful food for thought. I look forward to more posts and I do hope you do not fade away from this blog. ~Technospunky
Curating Reality » Cyborgology « Technospunky blah blah blogging on wordpress — July 1, 2012
[...] on thesocietypages.org Please Share this:TwitterFacebookPinterestMoreEmailPrintLinkedInTumblrRedditStumbleUponDiggLike [...]
Possibility vs. Potentiality: A Case Study in Documentary Consciousness » Cyborgology — July 26, 2012
[...] presentation as part of TtW2012’s “Logging off and Disconnection” panel), and the “laborious practices of protection, maintenance, and care” that social media users put into presenting themselves online. It highlights, too, how Facebook [...]
Curating Reality: Insights From the Chick-fil-A Wars » Cyborgology — August 7, 2012
[...] case of Chick-fil-A, and its debaters on both sides, is useful for delving deeper into issues of reality curation—an idea I wrote about previously. As a brief overview, reality curation is the flip-side of [...]
No One Tells Stories Alone » Cyborgology — September 15, 2012
[...] you may direct your self-narrative, but you don’t construct it in isolation from others. Reality curation, as Jenny Davis has explained, works in both directions. Further, as people comment on your posts and status updates, share [...]
Ready to be a Brand? » Cyborgology — October 8, 2012
[...] sense, interaction begets visibility, which begets interaction. I have talked previously about the curation of the social media landscape, where users make choices about who to follow and unfollow, who to Friend and UnFriend, who to [...]
A New Privacy, Part 3: Documentary Consciousness » Cyborgology — January 27, 2013
[...] asynchronous self-presentation that takes place on such websites, which has come to require “laborious practices of protection, maintenance, and care.” Attempting the [...]
The Curatorial Life » Cyborgology — January 29, 2014
[…] I’ve been thinking a lot about curation and its role in contemporary social life. I’ve had such thoughts before, and have since expanded upon them. Here’s where I […]
A New Privacy: Full Essay (Parts I, II, and III) » Cyborgology — June 19, 2014
[…] This kind of ‘transparency’ offers users not empowerment, but what Davis (@Jup83) calls “selective visibility”: users can reduce their awareness of being tracked by Google, but can do little (short of […]