Since the introduction of the internet to the private sphere, the structure of modern society has undergone a transformation in which social relations and communication has shifted into a realm of virtual reality. Computer networks now facilitate innovative forms of communication in new types of social environments in which people can meet, work, and play without ever seeing each other in the physical world. These types of interactions have provided a platform on which forms of virtual communities are being established. Computer-Mediated-Communications (CMCs) are clearly changing the way we live our lives, but the direction of change is still uncertain. If we are to understand that information exchange is the main foundation to communal relations, we can then concentrate on the question at hand. My point of interest here is the concept of communities and how a sense of community is generated in such an electronically digitalised environment.

Ferdinand Tönnies (1855-1936) endeavoured to explain the constituents and variants of community and society with what he coined Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Individuals in gemeinschaft, which is translated as ‘community’, are bound by a collective understanding or belief about the appropriate behaviours and responsibilities of its members, to each other and to the community at large. Individuals in gesellschaft, which is translated as ‘society’, tend to act more on self interest and do not necessarily share a common understanding or belief with others of that society. (Loomis 1957). According to sociologist Manuel Castells (1996), information is the key ingredient of social organisation and the flow of information between networks constitutes the basic thread of social structure. In this light, we may assert that technological innovation such as the internet is not a sphere that is separate from society, but it is actually what makes a large scale society possible. It may be argued that online communities diminish the physical interaction found in traditional social relations. This however, may be precisely the point of attraction for some. Rheingold (1993) points out that he would never take off his pyjamas unless he had to. Clearly, there are those who would prefer to satisfy their social needs in the comfort of their own home without having to physically interact with others.

There is a myriad of social networks on the internet. Almost every organisation, institution, company, or government body in the world today has an online realm in which associates, members, or guests can visit, exchange information, and interact with one another. The fact that all this is only a ‘mouse click’ away makes these online environments so accessible and convenient for everyone. These virtual communities are so closely linked with, and yet, not quite the tangible entity as the reality you can touch, feel, and physically enter. Take for example, an online chat room or a bulletin board; the website could be named “The Velvet Lounge” or “Red Rose Café”. Evidently, there’s neither a tangible lounge room nor café in the corporeal form, but in virtual reality they certainly exist and operate in a distinctively unique manner. “In virtual communities, the sense of place requires an individual act of imagination”. (Rheingold 1993: 2) These meeting rooms offer a virtual domain, in which people from all walks of life who have access to a computer, from anywhere on earth may interact with one another by having conversations, exchanging ideas and information, trading products and services, arranging personal meetings, or simply utilizing the domain as a channel of relationships with others. For instance, anyone who is interested in saving or protecting animals may visit the site of Humane Society International (www.hsi.org) and find a variety of sources and links that will enable them to participate in related activities. The site offers a discussion forum, a notice board, a news update centre, a support group, and news on current events. It provides an equal opportunity for those who wish to participate in saving animals by connecting with others all around the world who share a similar concern. Hence, a sense of community is generated. Meetings may also be held online and everyone attending the meeting through virtual reality may all be in various parts of the world. Certificates, degrees, awards, recognition, and accreditations can also be obtained online. As I was growing up, before the onset of digitalised environments and virtual domains, we had to physically go places or people had to arrive in order to interact with them. And it was all too time consuming to keep in touch with those friends who lived overseas. Now you can do all this by sitting in front of a computer screen in the spare of the moment. Furthermore, this can be done in real time, thus appropriating the spontaneity of communication of that particular moment. On the other hand, the spontaneity of real-time communication in a virtual domain can be somewhat obscured by the absence of the physical body.

As it is with all new and unchartered territory, the concept of cyberworlds naturally poses some major implications that must be explored. Kroker and Weinstein (1994) suggest that cyber-interactivity is the opposite of social relationships as the human presence is reduced to a twitching finger on a keyboard or mouse. Unlike the written word, much real- world communication is nonverbal. Physical actions such as facial expressions, gestures, and vocal tones are all crucial to understanding the intention or sincerity of an uttered word. The spontaneity of such physical actions cannot be found in virtual domains, for communication in this realm is a more deliberate and filtered activity. Eisner (1990) displays the effectiveness of facial expressions through caricature and how they can transform the meaning behind the words they accompany.

Text-based communications conducted online offer a versatile environment in which the identity of the individual remains anonymous. If the communicators do not actually meet one another in the physical world, one may never be certain of the personal particulars of the person with whom they are communicating. “The virtual superhighway is really about the full immersion of the flesh into its virtual double”. (Caldwell, ed. 2000: 120). Usually, the only identity an individual user requires is a ‘handle’ name which may be, and is generally expected to be, fictional. There is complete anonymity and ones identity can be fictionalized within the structure of the communication. Consequently, this creates an environment that is completely void from prejudice and bias. This type of text-based communication reduces discriminatory behaviours which can be based on social cues such as gender, race, socio-economic status, and physical features. “It is in this computer-mediated world that people experience a new sense of self that is decentred, multiple and fluid”. (Wajcman 2002: 359). As we, and all those with whom we communicate sit in front of a screen, we also have the power to ‘screen’ one another. The anonymity factor allows one the freedom to enter or exit a domain on impulse as well as pick where or with whom one wishes to communicate. Also, without any more physical assertion than the movement of ones hand, a person can visit a site that may be based thousands of miles away and communicate with others on that site as if they were in the same room.

We may then conclude that the concept of online communities is a by-product of technology that is influencing the way that people socially interact. It has created a realm in which everybody can gather in a specified domain, no matter what their identity or geographical position may be. It provides an easily accessible option for those who wish to interact with others who share similar interests, but are located very far from them. In light of our understanding of gemeinschaft and gesellschaft, we can see that there is a relevance of communal relations in online environments in that, virtual communities tend to comprise of people who share a common interest or belief. The subsequent anonymity which is applied to internet communications appears to provide a non discriminatory, non biased atmosphere in which people may freely communicate with one another without any preconceived notions which may not easily be suppressed during interactions in the physical world.


- by Sam Ozay

References:

Caldwell, J. T. (Ed.) 2000. Theories of New Media. An Historical
Perspective. Athlone Press: London
Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
Eisner, Will. 1990. Comics and Sequential Art. Tamarac, FL: Poorhouse
Press.
Kroker, A. & Weinstein, M. A. 1994. ‘Data Trash: The Theory of a Virtual
Class’. In Caldwell, J. T. (Ed.) 2000. Theories of New Media. An Historical Perspective. Athlone Press: London
Loomis, C. P. (Ed.) 1957. Community and Society (Gemeinschaft Und
Gesellschaft). Tönnies, F. 1855- 1936.
Rheingold, H. 1993. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the
Electronic Frontier.http://www.rheingold.com/vc/book/index.html, Sat. April 1, 2006
Wajcman, J. 2002. ‘Addressing Technological Change: The Challenge to
Social Theory’ in Current Sociology. May, Vol. 50 (3): 347-363