cultural differences of social networking sites
Wednesday, August 26, 2009 by 3982652
In class Luke Goode talked about cultural differences on SNS, and whether there were social class distinctions between those who use different SNS. I have been thinking about it in terms of New Zealand, and the sites which I think are the biggest SNS around at the moment, Bebo and Facebook. From my own observation of SNS, I agree with Danah Boyd when she says that SNS attract members depending on there social class. Although I understand Bebo has appeared to be loosing members over the last couple of years to Facebook, myself included, I notice there are still some very devoted friends of mine who still adore Bebo, and who refuse to move to Facebook, or to participate the same way on Facebook as they do on Bebo.
From what I have noticed is that Facebook seems to be a site where the friends I have are what I consider, of a higher social class, who are socio-economically more advantaged, and what Boyd describes as from a “hegemonic society”. Academically I notice they are those who are of a more educated background, which probably reflects the origins of Facebook where it was intended for Harvard academics. I feel the aesthetics of Facebook tend towards more what I consider is a kind of “high art or culture” in cyber space or SNS terms. The lay-out, features, and particularly the minimalism of Facebook that Boyd discusses is what gives it this effect. Facebook has what I consider a more sophisticated, simple, clean site and is more about the content and words, rather than making the profile look a certain way, so those that use it are asked to be more academic in a sense.
Bebo in contrast is what I think is more low art or culture, thus people of lower social class or what society considers “alternative groups” may gravitate towards it more. Much of what makes Bebo low art in a cyber space sense is the overall aesthetics of Bebo. Unlike Facebook, I feel it is more cluttered with a lot of colour, where you can customize your “skin” to whatever you like, whether it’s a Rihanna skin or the other popular culture skins that are available.
From this I definitely feel the decision to gravitate towards Bebo or Facebook definitely reflects the differences in social class, groups and lifestyles in New Zealand.
From what I have noticed is that Facebook seems to be a site where the friends I have are what I consider, of a higher social class, who are socio-economically more advantaged, and what Boyd describes as from a “hegemonic society”. Academically I notice they are those who are of a more educated background, which probably reflects the origins of Facebook where it was intended for Harvard academics. I feel the aesthetics of Facebook tend towards more what I consider is a kind of “high art or culture” in cyber space or SNS terms. The lay-out, features, and particularly the minimalism of Facebook that Boyd discusses is what gives it this effect. Facebook has what I consider a more sophisticated, simple, clean site and is more about the content and words, rather than making the profile look a certain way, so those that use it are asked to be more academic in a sense.
Bebo in contrast is what I think is more low art or culture, thus people of lower social class or what society considers “alternative groups” may gravitate towards it more. Much of what makes Bebo low art in a cyber space sense is the overall aesthetics of Bebo. Unlike Facebook, I feel it is more cluttered with a lot of colour, where you can customize your “skin” to whatever you like, whether it’s a Rihanna skin or the other popular culture skins that are available.
From this I definitely feel the decision to gravitate towards Bebo or Facebook definitely reflects the differences in social class, groups and lifestyles in New Zealand.