Capitalising on friendship
Monday, September 7, 2009 by gelise123
There’s no doubt about it: social networking sites – SNSs – have become a large fixture in the culture of today’s web-savvy youth. A recent informal survey of my peers revealed that almost all of them counted a SNS in their routine of web sites they visit on a daily basis. I myself am a member of two SNSs – Facebook and Orkut – and I visit the sites up to two or three times a day. What is the attraction? How have these sites managed to get so ingrained in our day-to-day lives?
I believe Robert Putnam hit the nail on the head with his theory of “bonding capital” and “bridging capital”. He describes bonding capital as how we are able to strengthen the bond between ourselves and people we already have strong ties to – eg. close friends and family members. “Bridging capital”, on the other hand, refers to the ability to stay in touch with people you might usually not – eg. old classmates and acquaintances. These are exactly the two reasons why I frequently use Facebook. I am able to strengthen the bond with my close friends by commenting on their photos, playing online games with them and posting messages on their walls. I am also able to keep in touch with people I wouldn’t usually, for example friends I made when I was on exchange in Spain.
I actually think that the “bridging capital” that sites like Facebook provide is more important than the “bonding capital”, as you are more likely to make the effort to interact with people you have strong ties with in the real world anyway. Without SNSs though, it would be far too easy to lose complete contact with that extra hundred people on your friends list, thus giving you far fewer opportunities for networking in the future.
However, when Judith Donagh asks in Signals in Social Supernets, “Will SNSs shift peoples social world from one focused on a few important relationships to one consisting of an immense number of weak relationships?”, I say “No”. The “immense number of weak relationships” that SNS sites enable may be an important part of our networking opportunities, but are still secondary to our “real” social life.
I believe Robert Putnam hit the nail on the head with his theory of “bonding capital” and “bridging capital”. He describes bonding capital as how we are able to strengthen the bond between ourselves and people we already have strong ties to – eg. close friends and family members. “Bridging capital”, on the other hand, refers to the ability to stay in touch with people you might usually not – eg. old classmates and acquaintances. These are exactly the two reasons why I frequently use Facebook. I am able to strengthen the bond with my close friends by commenting on their photos, playing online games with them and posting messages on their walls. I am also able to keep in touch with people I wouldn’t usually, for example friends I made when I was on exchange in Spain.
I actually think that the “bridging capital” that sites like Facebook provide is more important than the “bonding capital”, as you are more likely to make the effort to interact with people you have strong ties with in the real world anyway. Without SNSs though, it would be far too easy to lose complete contact with that extra hundred people on your friends list, thus giving you far fewer opportunities for networking in the future.
However, when Judith Donagh asks in Signals in Social Supernets, “Will SNSs shift peoples social world from one focused on a few important relationships to one consisting of an immense number of weak relationships?”, I say “No”. The “immense number of weak relationships” that SNS sites enable may be an important part of our networking opportunities, but are still secondary to our “real” social life.