First of all: Threaded Comments For The Win! All I’ve got to do is figure out how to turn it on.
Anyway, to the assignment.
I found the bridging vs. bonding concept to be the most intriguing as well as providing an interesting framework for levels of trust, and settled in to find communities that exhibited both kinds of interaction. I decided to join Listal and del.icio.us. Listal is a community where you list and rank everything you’ve read, listened to, watched, or played, and can connect with people with similar interests. At first I assumed this would be a blatant bridging type of community. However, closer inspection of the forums frequented by the users illustrated that frequently, deeper friendships were forged through the use of the community. For example, one young man started a thread about writing, inviting others to share what they’d written themselves. As the discussion progressed, first between only the OP and the first respondent, their language became more relaxed, they joked around and encouraged each other with their writing. And then the conversation that started with the Question Person and the Answer Person started to bring in other people as well, filling out the conversation a bit more.
an exchange on the Writing board at Listal
Although it’s a limited example, this type of back and forth support and encouragement is the kind of behavior I associate with bonding rather than bridging.
del.icio.us, on the other hand, really is a bridging SNS. It’s social bookmarking, sharing links to interesting things with other people. I hoped to find some good typography sites, and was inundated with loads of links from various users.
a fraction of the sites tagged as 'typography'
I came to recognize my taste ran parallel to some particular users, and discovered they had other interesting links as well. For example, I followed a user who had bookmarked I Love Typography, clicked on the ‘inspiration’ tag, and found a link to a really interesting architect’s site.
it's industrial and modern! what's not to love? ok, don't answer that, just appreciate that I appreciate it.
For me, that’s the kind of interaction that indicates bridging behavior.
I like the system of trust built into del.icio.us better than that of Listal because, quite frankly, it’s easier to ignore a link to something you don’t agree with or find interesting than it is to ignore an entire review you don’t agree with. The simple fact that there is more commentary in Listal makes the trust perhaps more broad, but also more difficult to earn. Also, due to the nature of listing everything you’ve consumed, there is much more inherent negativity in Listal compared to the all-recommendations nature of del.icio.us.
The complicated part of this session’s work was the final project aspect. The way I view social networking sites has been very definitely altered, in a good way, for sure, but it makes me want to pause and re-evaluate some things I thought I had a handle on. It’s not a particular secret that I enjoy television shows, and I think I’d like to focus my research on online communities that form around them. Specifically, what kinds of connections do people make within the communities? are they weak or strong ties? Do they extend beyond the original purpose of the community, that is, to share information about a tv show?
I’m particularly interested in how the new groups form and create social roles within themselves over time. How do the social norms form within new communities? Gleave’s paper was particularly interesting to me. I’d like to follow the formation of a new online community and work out how the social roles get filled. The mid-season replacement shows just started, so there should be some new communities cropping up. Dollhouse, for example, just started airing a couple weeks ago, and Joss Whedon fans aren’t really known for their silence, so that may be a good place to look. Gleave did an excellent job deconstructing Wikipedia, but content for fan communities is generated in different ways, and I’d like to look into that more. If new communities are to succeed, how do maintainers generate enough initial content to keep the comm going? Does the bulk of the content fall to one person, or does the responsibility eventually get split up? How does that happen?
I’m eager to read other people’s thoughts on their projects and look forward to refining my own, so questions and comments are definately appreciated.
Chakroff's Blog 
I think looking into communities surrounding TV shows is a great idea. We’ve actually been discussing that a little bit in another project I’m involved with — trying to discover which communities are more closely tied. Do Seinfeld fans identify with their community more than Friends? Or sticking purely with Whedon, do different roles form in the Buffy communities v. Firefly? Is there more activity for one canceled show over the other?
I’ve been meaning to join del.icio.us, but just never really bothered. I always wonder how much people care about other links they find based on other users. Trust seems like an important issue, although I’d say that maybe the term here should be… relevance? I can trust another person to have links that I’d be interested in, but they could just as easily have a list that I didn’t care about. Relevance and trust need not be the same thing.
Comment by karhai — March 8, 2009 @ 8:45 pm
Thanks, I wasn’t sure if what I was thinking about made much sense or not. That is a really interesting question, about how close-knit communities get. What is it about a particular show that inspires people to band together, while another show creates more loosely-tied networks?
you know, I’ve got the delicious plug-in for firefox, and I still only remember to use it half the time, so it’s nice to know I can access stuff I like from any computer, but it’s hit or miss whether I remembered to tag it or not. I like the distinction between trust and relevance, especially when it comes to taste in things. Some guy could always link to great tech articles but listen to really horrendous metal bands, and I’d see his name on the one site and check it out thinking trusting his taste would be compatible with mine, only to be bitterly disappointed. He’d be a really relevant linker with bad taste that just isn’t trustworthy. That kind of puts a whole new spin on exactly what ‘trust’ implies. I can’t say I’d be eager to meet up with some dude who happens to link to really interesting articles on Canadian politics based solely on the fact that he keeps current with the goings-on with our neighbors to the north.
Comment by chakroff — March 9, 2009 @ 2:43 am
I watch a lot of television too, but never really got involved with any communities related to TV. One website that you might want to check out is the new TV.com. It was in the news recently since Hulu pulled their content from the site. I haven’t really looked at it in-depth, but it seems to have a lot more community features than Hulu does. The front page has this neat thing where they cycle through a few television shows (not unlike sites like Cnet or Hulu). However, there’s also question related to the show along with answers posted by other users. You can also rate, comment, and even blog about shows on the site. If you do check it out, I’m looking forward to reading your opinions :)
Comment by keokilee — March 8, 2009 @ 12:33 pm
man, like right before I read this, i thought, “hey, you know what might be interesting? looking at an established site like TV.com or BuddyTV compared to a new, narrow one.” But I’d never really been to either site, so it was a random floating thought. But then you make some really interesting points–there’s already an infrastructure to the bigger sites, so they have a leg up on attracting users in the first place. Of course, now I have to go to TV.com to check it out for research. bummer.
You said you’d never gotten involved in tv-related communities, and it made me wonder why I did in the first place–I quite frankly thought the people were a little too enthusiastic. I finally remembered, though, because it was really going to bother me if I didn’t. Farscape: The Peacekeeper Wars was airing soon, and I wanted to know how I could watch earlier episodes before the miniseries came out. I mean, I wasn’t even looking to talk to anybody about it, it was purely an info hunt. And now look at me. Weird.
Comment by chakroff — March 9, 2009 @ 2:18 am
Sounds like a fun topic! I was going to suggest the Colbert Nation Community, but after rereading your post, it looks like you want to analyze the creation of these online communities. I just find it interesting how members are engaged not only through forums, but also remix/editing challenges, and even having the option to edit “Wikiality, the Truthiness Encyclopedia.”
It seems that some tv show communities may sometimes be comprised mostly of females or vice versa. I wonder if this affects the way social roles are filled or the connections that are made. Also, would TV genre make a difference as well?
Comment by thechickenbus — March 7, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
You know I’ll have to check out Colbert’s site all the same, right? There’s Truthiness involved! But yeah, the way the comm involves people not just through forums, that’s kind of the thing I’m interested in looking at/for. I don’t know, maybe they didn’t have any of the challenges until they had a lot of users? or they got users by having challenges? this time there might actually be an answer to the chicken or the egg question.
And you make good points about gender and genre, too. Those are things I hadn’t thought of yet, but I’m betting you’re right about social roles and connections being somewhat different amongst a majority-female community. Plus, ain’t no one getting between a sci-fi fan and her show, but you don’t see that kind of drive from viewers of Two and a Half Men.
OH! wait, you mean would genre effect social roles and connections? hmm. I’m guessing yes to connections because ComiCon and the Paley Festival (and meeting up during) are really enthusiastically talked about. As for social roles…I honestly don’t even have a guess for that one. I wonder of gender plays much of a role at all in which social roles people take on online. I imagine that’d be a hard one to study, as it’d be self-reporting, and that’s only accurate as long as people are telling the truth.
Comment by chakroff — March 9, 2009 @ 1:57 am
You mentioned that the Listal community had capabilities for social bonding. Would you say that that was the primary types of connections made between users (the focus of the site), or were those the exceptions that proved the rule? It seems to me that any system that has a interactive feedback/conversation facility (of whatever form) has the capability for “bonding” (this includes MMORPGs, forums, SNSs, and the like).
Accordingly, I agree with you that del.icio.ous is a bridging type site. I have never used it, but from what I can tell from visiting its page, it does not seem to have any kind of dedicated conversation facility, so this certainly rules it out as a bonding type site. Or does it? Might it be considered to be a bonding activity if you befriend friends in delicious from “real life”? I could just have mis-understood the entire bonding/bridging concept, though. Something for me to mull over, I guess.
Regarding your project, it sounds like you’ve got a plan for some the empirical data. I wonder if you would get responses by the administrators of these sites if you were to send them a list of relevant questions (it would be interesting to see if the bigger “commercial” sites are more or less likely to respond than the “grass roots” ones, I suspect the latter).
I also wonder how much analytical data is out there (especially given your very specific topic choice). I guess you could just take some general sources and extrapolate/relate from there. I do think your specificity is a good thing, at least it means you’ve got something concrete in mind. I, on the other hand, now think I’ve presented a much too general project proposal post.
Comment by David K. — March 6, 2009 @ 11:15 pm
You know, there seemed to be two main sections of the site: a part where you can look at lists and add to your own, and another part where users could interact. It makes it more difficult to judge the main purpose of the site, but I’m guessing that while there is some bonding going on, most people probably keep it pretty light. In a strange way, though (and I don’t have the psych degree to explain this), I feel like the site did a good job of building trust without falling back on an actual rating system. It used more of a web approach to trust, ie I like Iron Man and Mr. and Mrs. Smith, and so does Ted, so I’m more likely to consider his suggestion to read Fight Club. I think it must be the “people just like me” thing.
Oh, and thanks for the comment about commercial vs. grass roots sites, I think that might be an interesting way to look at things–there’s different motivation and different resources, so how do they both stay afloat. (and I totally think you’re right about who would respond.
and dude, I think your project sounds fascinating. I’ve wondered it myself before. Maybe if you narrowed it down to behavior related to a specific type of site? Maybe people who join MMORPGs become more extroverted, but people who join, say, support groups are equally inhibited in online forums and in real life? I don’t know, but I do think there must be some type of behavior change.
Comment by chakroff — March 9, 2009 @ 1:43 am
Thank you for your perspective on bridging and bonding. Especially the notion of bonding between people who may not actually have links in RL. I think my perspective before looking at sites was that bonding was primarily relationships online that supported existing RL relationships. But you’re right, bridging can link people, providing opportunity to build deeper relationships, even RL relationships.
And the Joss Whedon fan comment is right on the money. I am a Firefly fan and the community that arose around that show was/is awesome to be a part of!
Comment by Linnea — March 5, 2009 @ 9:46 pm
You’re looking for comment threading, does this help http://en.blog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/comment-threading-is-here-plus-other-cool-comment-settings/
I agree with you and Linnea about Joss Whedon fans; they are certainly vocal and would provide a lot of content, I wish I knew some sites/forums to recommend but I do not. Good luck on your project.
Comment by darthmoll — March 7, 2009 @ 12:11 pm
Argh, stupid two profiles, if gets confusing, anyway, darthmoll is me, Molly. Just wanted to clarify.
Comment by molly due — March 7, 2009 @ 12:16 pm
yeah! that’s what I saw earlier when I logged in, totally made me happy, although clearly I’m crap at sharing the link. Apparently anyone else interested in it was supposed to divine the answers out of thin air.
and seriously, I don’t think any group of fans can ever be considered quiet if they get a Big Damn Movie made :) You know how they do the screening every year-Serenity Now–for Equality Now? I always learn about it, like, the week before, and I’ve yet to be in a city holding a screening. Very sad to me. I mean–a whole room of people who like the movie, a big screen…I’ve yet to see the downside.
Comment by chakroff — March 9, 2009 @ 1:26 am
Hi,
Really interesting stuff you uncovered. FYI on the television thing for your final project–Hulu.com does have discussion boards but I’m not sure how often people check up on them or respond. There didn’t seem to be too much give and take on the boards–more venting than anything else. I love Hulu, so I was kind of disappointed that I couldn’t really connect to people who love the shows I enjoy.
I also had preconceived notions when joining Twitter. I thought there would be more bonding going on, but found the forced shortness of the 140 character “chirp” was too short to do anything but update others on what they are doing. It reminded me of an earlier reading by Nardi et. al that used the terms “log your being” Twitter definitely fosters “weak ties” (Ellison, Steinfield, Lampe) and it seems that the site is full of offline to online relationships. It’s really interesting to me that people can form lasting relationships out of thin air in an online forum like the one you found.
Comment by Stacy — March 5, 2009 @ 9:54 am
That’s a bummer about Hulu’s boards being more venting than anything. It seems like the site should be a natural place to foster some pretty active forums. Maybe people tend to just use it as a drive-by? Watch the show and then write about it in a different blog? Or, actually, now that I think about it, maybe Hulu’s forums aren’t that active because the people using the site are more tv-people than internet-people. Example: my dad talked about watching something on Hulu the other day, and his use of the internet extends to Google Maps.
I was talking to my friend, the one who coerced me into joining Twitter in the first place, and she said she uses it just to keep tabs on people she knows and to keep abreast of tech writing and design while she’s in Japan doing neither of those things. So there are clearly benefits, but to me, there’s too much effort and not quite enough payoff to really get into it.
Comment by chakroff — March 9, 2009 @ 1:19 am