Regulation in Online Communities

The ‘information superhighway’ has arguably become the most revolutionary technology, connecting billions of people all around the world. It is clear that computer networks allow people to create a range of new social spaces in which to meet and interact with one another (Kollock and Smith, 1999). Instead of people talking to machines, computer networks are being used to connect people to other people (Wellman et al., 1996 cited in Kollock and Smith, 1999).  E-mails, social networking, programmes like Skype; anyone who regularly goes online will more often than not communicate with someone online during their online sessions.

But with technology that allows instant connection to anywhere in the world anonymously, there are obvious issues. The idea of identity becomes very blurred in an online environment, as Kollock and Smith (1999) explain:

‘Online interaction strips away many of the cues and signs that are part of face-to-face interaction’

Users can hide their age, gender, race or class when communicating online, which can lead to deception. In “Reading race online: discovering racial identity in Usenet discussions”, Byron Burkhalter says that online interaction changes the dynamics of racial identity, and not always for the better. With anonymity online, there is no fear of repercussions or consequences. Does this mean online communities must be governed closely or are online communities simply the easiest way to express opinion, as politically incorrect as they may be?

In Communities in Cyberspace, Elizabeth Reid writes of Roseanne Stone’s research into the governance of the CommuniTree bulletin board:

(It) was intended to be a forum for intellectual and spiritual discussion among adults. It was an environment where censorship was censured and each user’s privacy was both respected and guaranteed by the system’s administrators. The community is fostered collapsed under the onslaught of messages, often obscene, posted by the first generation of adolescent school children with personal computers and modems. (1991)

These online communities have often been described as freeing users from social constraints.  Although they usually disagree on the effects of decreased social inhibition, some researchers of human behaviour have noted that users tend to behave more freely and spontaneously than they would in face-to-face encounters (Reid, 1999). While it can (and should) be a good thing, it also leads users to feel free to express anger and hatred at other people who could be strangers. (Kiesler et al., 1984 cited in Reid, 1999). For example, flaming is an online phenomenon where users use uninhibited expression of “remarks containing swearing, insults, name calling and hostile comments” (Ibid). 

With the possibility of these problems occurring in an online community, it does seem essential for some kind of regulations to be put in place for the sake of everyone involved. Jenny Preece describes possible ways to prevent a breakdown of social etiquette in online environment:

Two well-known approaches that specifically address etiquette solutions are setting rules (often called Netiquette) and moderating discussions (2004).

But she goes on to say that these can be somewhat ineffective and needs to be improved upon:

The way forward is to develop processes that bring together the best human-oriented approaches with good technical support... Processes that encourage communities to develop self-governing etiquette standards are promising. In addition to preventing obvious breaches of etiquette, processes are needed for dealing with subtle etiquette problems such as clever pranks designed to incite reactions and inadvertent impoliteness due to cultural misunderstandings. A deeper knowledge of semiotics is needed to build these kinds of applications.

As Peerce states, with the continuing growth of the online community, etiquette in these communities isn’t just wanted, but it is necessary for all those involved.

Bibliography:

Preece, J., (2004) Etiquette Online: From Nice to Necessary. Communications of the ACM, vol. 47, no. 4.

Smith, M., and Kollock, P., Reid, E., (1999) Communities in Cyerspace. London: Routledge.

Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Guila, M., and Haythornthwaite, C., (1996). Computer Networks as Social Networks, Annual Review of Sociology 22: 211-38

Stone, A. R., (1991) Will the Real Body Please Stand Up? Boundary Stories about Virtual Cultures, Cyperspace: First Steps, (ed) Benedikt, M. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.