The Impact of Online Communities on Physica Social Relationships Essay Example

communities can be found in the world wide web. People meet online to run blogs, meaning online diaries, share information and photos, exchange Youtube videos or unionize in a political, cultural, social and economic way (Das Internet als soziales Erlebnis, 2007). But not only can real life people get together and share common interests, they can also abandon their individual personalities and become somebody else: Second Life, a virtual world, allows their members to create an avatar of their choice and guide it through its world with virtual people, entertainment, opportunities and semi-virtual marketplaces (Second Life, 2008).

According to Computer Industry Almanac Inc. (2007), more than 1. 2 billion people use the internet worldwide and the largest online community has over 200 million members.Nevertheless, the effect on physical relationships must be investigated. Although online communities provide social advantages for certain groups of people, they cannot replace real life relationships due to their limitation of peoples’ abilities of developing their own personalities and the loss of the sense of profound interpersonal relationships.

Discussion

Online communities provide social advantages for two groups of people. First of all, persons with certain handicaps that limit their mobility can benefit from the easy handling and accessibility of the internet.They get the chance to interact with other people disregarding their special needs. For example, someone who cannot leave their house due to an illness is able to communicate with their friends over the internet without any barricades and can enjoy companionship, consideration, communication and affection (Hayes, 1984), just as in physical social relationships. Another group of people that takes use in cultivating their friendships online are the ones that are affected by globalization in

their professional lives and whose friends live no longer around the corner.Since many people work abroad, in globalized companies and the chances of being able to stay in the same job for more than five years are low, society is constantly on the move and grows internationally and everybody has friends who live everywhere in the world and they don’t see as much as they used to.

Since the establishment of online communities, however, these people possess a tool that makes it easier to stay in touch with old friends and to get to know new ones as well as establish business relations with people from all over the world within seconds.In conclusion, online communities are useful for people with special needs and internationally driven lives. On the other hand, online communities like Second Life limit peoples’ abilities of developing their own personalities. By projecting their lives onto avatars, it is hard to differentiate between the real world and the virtual world.

Success and failure as well as capabilities and skills that are experienced online are oftentimes lacking in real life, although this is hardly noticed. (Scribner, 2007).It is so much easier to be everyone you want to be in the online world: The shy guy turns into a womanizer and the unemployed pretends to be a wealthy businessman driving a Mercedes. And while more and more time is spent online with the virtual alter ego, Second Life gradually becomes “First Life”. It is a time consuming activity that also need a lot of energy and dedication.

People forget to lead their real lives, which are a lot more difficult, but at the same time also much more

rewarding.Investing into real friendships, situations and businesses gives back a lot in return; solving real life problems shapes the character in a positive way (Erbe, 2007). Online friendships, however, don’t require the effort of character shaping and therefore limit the development of personalities. People who spent too much time in online communities like Facebook lose the sense of profound interpersonal relationships. When communicating online, the receiver of your message is not physically present and, therefore, cannot grasp the whole message that consists of nonverbal communication also.

The sender blocks body language and appearance out of the message, the sender cannot react or give immediate feedback (Warford, n. d. ). Therefore, the communication is incomplete. Oftentimes, this results in shallow talks with meaningless subjects and if any problems arise and a relationship becomes difficult, it can be very easy just to cut the respective individual out of your life or to “say” things to them that you would never dare in real life. Especially in the community Facebook where private data is made openly accessible for others, this can lead to anonymous gossiping and mobbing.

At the same time, Facebook and similar institutions change the meaning of the term friendship as they promote the collection of friends and the goal to have as many online friends as possible (Lovenberg, 2007). Nevertheless, quantity cannot replace quality and, therefore, it is very hard for users of those communities to begin and keep profound and meaningful relationships. Conclusion While our life is made easier and faster by the use of online communication and its benefits are evident to people with limited mobility and a global lifestyle, the emerging downsides must also

be considered.Spending too much time in virtual communities and putting a lot of energy into virtual lives and friendships can gradually lead to a lack of development of a real personality and a limitation of profound real life relationships.

Therefore, it is important to find the balance between online friendships and physical social relationships. Real life is still happening outside the internet.

References

1. Computer Industry Almanac Inc. (2007, February 12). Worldwide internet users top 1.72 billion in 2006. Retrieved April, 20, 2008, from http://www. c-i-a. com/pr0207. htm Das Internet als soziales Erlebnis.
2. The internet as a social experience]. (2007, June 4). Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 127, 31. Erbe, B.(2007, September 10).
3. A real downside to virtual relationships. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from http://www. usnews.com/blogs/erbe /2007/9/10/a-real-downside-to-virtual-relationships. html Hayes, R. (1984). Friendship behaviors.
4. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://family. jrank. org/pages/660/Friendship-Benefits-Friendship. html Lovenberg, F. von (2007, November 10).
5. Und wann steigen Sie aus? [And when will you drop out? ]. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 262, Z1. Scribner, R. (2007, June 11). Second Life’ presents societal dangers.
6. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from http://media. www. reflector-online. com/media/ storage/paper938/news/2007/11/06/Opinion/second. Life. Presents.
7. Societal. Dangers-3079650-page2. shtml Second Life. (2008).
8. What is Second Life?. Retrieved April, 8, 2008, fromhttp://secondlife. com/whatis Warford, H. (n. d. ).
9. Virtual vs. real communities [Msg 5]. Message posted to http://www. theinstitute. ieee. org/portal/site/tionline/menuitem.