Thought Paper: October 5

It seems that actual research is catching up with the study of New Media. Slowly the analysis of the Internet’s role in society is moving away from questionable data, shoddy methodology, or mere conjecture. The age of reason and empirical investigation is beginning to dawn over the cyber-landscape. This is a common thread through many of the readings for this week from Society Online: The Internet in Context (Howard, P. N., & Jones, S. (eds.), 2004). As the early mass media was feared for its “magic bullet” effects on the public, so to the Internet has suffered from the extreme bi-polar predictions of cyber-Utopia and virtual singing of “Kumbaya” by handholding Avatars to ruin and collapse of the world and civilization as we know it.

As Rice and Katz, determined in “The Internet and Political Involvement in 1996 and 2000,” the Internet had a mild impact on the 1996 and 2000 elections, and by extension, our political life and/or our democratic system. Internet usage or lack of usage was not associated with increased political involvement. The offline politically uninterested will most likely remain uninterested online. Cyber-life follows real life.

In “The Bridging and Bonding Role of Online Communities” by Pippa Norris, the data reveals that online communities have not replaced the face-to-face interaction of individuals and groups. As with Elana Larsen’s findings in “Deeper Understanding, Deeper Ties: Taking Faith Online,” online communities and religious groups are mildly affective at bonding like-minded individuals and slightly less affective at bridging individuals with differences. The role of these online communities is to augment the physical relationship – with ease of information gathering through communal Web sites and interpersonal communication through email – not to replace them. People have not abandoned their houses of worship to join boundless spiritual enclaves anymore than hate Web sites have attracted new membership (see Southern Poverty Laws Center study) to enclaves of hatred and bigotry. Socially and ideologically homogeneous people will gather, online or offline, and the adventurous will seek out the diverse. Cyber-life follows real life.

As these studies reveal, the Internet is not the pantisocracy or the Pandora’s box that early “visionaries” predicted. It is showing itself simply as a new tool in the age-old activity of communication—interpersonal or mass. Granted this communication is quicker, Interactive and features some cool shiny add-ons, but at the end of the day, it is still the communication mankind has be practicing since our first grunts. Cyber-life follows real life.