Today i'm looking at folksonomy. Ineed, the word does seem to connote something reminiscent of that thing we use to hold dear in America, but which has since seem to become a figment of our imaginations. This, however, is far from what a folksonomy is.

A conjuction of the words 'folk' and 'taxonomy,' a folksonomy is a term used to describe classification and categorization on the web. Most users familiar with sites like Digg, Reddit and others would immediately be able to relate with this concept. The rise of social bookmarking as a way to disseminate the incomprehensible amount of the data on the web has become exponentially popular. There is really no better way to have the internet take some shape and become something of relevance. Anyone who has spent some time on search engines can empathize with the frustation that can occur when you're looking for something specific and the search engine brings up web pages that have no relevance, but because the word appears is among the first ten web pages you see.

A site like Digg allows users to rate how much they like a website, and subsequently it can become popular if enough users agree on it's relative value. This reminds me alot of a concept I learned in one of my first communication classes about the semantic trianle. In a nutshell, a word is assigned to an object, it is agreed upon by the majority, and it comes to symbolize that object: arbitrary, abstract, and ambiguous are the terms we used to describe a word. The same applies to what makes a page on digg popular; the majority agree that a web page has value--arbitrary, the web pages' relevance to the digg community is difficult to discern--abstract, what makes it popular is the fact that people find meaning in it differently--ambiguous.

This, i'm sure, even qualifies as an abstract interpretation of what a folksonomy is. There may be a more appropriate theory that explains the mechanics of social bookmarking, but I thought I would just introduce this concept to our ongoing discussion.

Feel free to bookmark it if you like!

Make me a MySpace friend

One of the most fascinating aspects of social networking sites is the ability to completely govern the perception of one's identity. By allowing users to customize their page to even the smallest details, people are able to control and mediate how people will view them, and to some extent, how they will view themselves.



What triggered this thought episode was s segment on "The Mike and Juliet Morning Show." A sixteen year old girl came on to oppose her mother policing her friends, blogs and MySpace. The girl's contention was that not every aspect of who she is should be her mothers business, to which the mother responded with the right to privacy is waived as long as the daughter lives in her house. I was captivated because it's interesting to examine this from the perspective of identity formation.



The sixteen year old explained how she used MySpace to vent her thoughts, highlite episodic events with friends, and discuss topics like sexuality, drug use and more with her friends. The issue was essentially that her mother felt that she was representing herself as one way in person, and completely different online. This was, of course, a valid concern but the question still remains: why?



In an article in Media Psychology (2008), the author discusses how users alternate between extroversion and introversion when performing public presentations online. This suggests, according to the author, an "identity shift" that may embolden someone to be more forthcoming with information that is personal online. In the case of the sixteen year old, this may explain why she maintained dual identities; remaining introverted around mom but disclosing very personal information to her online friends. It also speaks to the power of the internet in social networks.

Social networking on the internet levels the playing field. In a related article in the Journal of Family Communication, the relationship of power is discussed; in particular, noting how relational satisfaction is intensified when power is percieved to be shared. The fact that this same sixteen year old can have her favorite music artists, close friends, and people she just met all as her friends effectively makes even remote connections very possible.

So I would conclude that it does make a difference whether or not someone's parent is their MySpace friend. After all, there are some power relationships that don't change!

Web 2.0 you say?

In 2004, at a media and technology conference, the O'Reilly media conference a new term to describe the changing face of the internet was born, "Web 2.0." Despite some debate circulating between technology experts and their camps, the effects of Web 2.0 are as real as anything else about the internet. In a nutshell, Web 2.0 describes the trend on the World Wide Web and among web designers to create sites that allow users to be more creative, share information, and most notably, collaborate. Any quick survey of the most popular contemporary websites would yield such results as Myspace, Facebook, YouTube and others; evidence of what tech experts begin touting in 2004. These sites allow users to create highly customized content, share information among other users, and of course become associated with other like minded users.

The eloquence in social networking sites such as these is their ability to incorporate a fundamental communication principle: interactionism. Of course, many communication scholars would say that a system such as this is based on an antiquated view of communication, but it serves to show the changing scope of the internet to reflect the patterns of human communication. No, not quite perfect yet!

The point here is how fast they have taken root. Site goers appreciate being able to send AND receive messages; create relevant content, and create a shared experience. This characteristic is what gives social networking sites their relevance in a discussion of the future of the internet.

Obviously, this topic is entirely too broad to truly give it justice so this will be an ongoing discussion.

So what is this all about?

Recently, I've awaken to the advent of social networking sites. I haven't decided if i was just being stubborn to change or just simply naive to the fact that Myspace, Facebook, and others we're completely transforming the way we interact with the Internet. For me, it started with signing up for a Digg account. I had began to see the impact that social bookmarking was having because every page i visited had a button following the end of the article giving the user an option to share (i.e.; Blog, Digg, publish, etc.) I decided that I had two options: remain indifferent to the evolving world around me, pretending that it was all a fad the same way text messaging had been with cell phones; or i could jump on board and find out what was the driving force behind people choosing to immerse themselves in this world of social networks, information sharing, and Web 2.0. I will keep a running update of all the discoveries I make so that if you're like me (an infant to all of this), then you will be able to benefit from the knowledge that emerges.

The other part of it for me is that I'm a communication researcher. I find myself so fascinated by the way humans send and receive messages that I plan on completing doctoral studies on the phenomena (so of course, this will make for some great research). So in addition to deconstructing just what makes Myspace and Facebook so effective, I will also be looking at the communication theory that explains it. All you social researchers should have some fun with this too!