Online Image is Representation of Our Real Self
Internet Self-Representation Through Communication
Jun 27, 2009 Cynthia Jones-Shoeman
We can communicate online in so many ways. What does our communication say about us online when we have no other way to represent ourselves?
Communicating Online
There are many communities on the internet in which we can represent ourselves. In a text-based world, we have many ways to characterize ourselves, and there are various ways in which we can communicate—email, blogs, text messaging, instant messages, chat rooms, forums, discussion boards, personal websites, and more; the list is endless.
How we communicate is also a representation of ourselves in cyberspace. Online representation is fueled by “computer-mediated communication,” also known as “CMC” (Geise). At its most basic, CMC is conducted through the use of text.
Positive Reasons to Communicate Online
There are positive and negative aspects of communicating online. There are many positive reasons to communicate in cyberspace when compared to face-to-face communication. The best reason is that an individual’s statements cannot be prejudged based on his physical appearance, so it is harder to marginalize a person on the internet. The internet, in this sense, can be viewed as the ultimate “equalizer.”
On the other hand, most times it is impossible to determine a person’s state of mind or mood based simply on the text he has typed unless he overtly mentions it (for instance, “I am mad at you”). Not seeing a person’s facial expressions or body language or hearing his tone of voice can leave doubt as to that person’s intent (Geise). Communication in cyberspace has overcome some of these obstacles.
Clarifying Communication
While internet communication has “leveled the playing field,” at the same time it has forced us to be much clearer in our written communication. Internet communication is less dependent upon things such as appearance (including clothing, hairstyle, and bodily ornamentation); things about ourselves that we have no control over (such as gender, age, sexual orientation, and race); and body language, gestures, and other verbal cues than communication that is conducted face-to-face.
People whom we communicate with online depend upon our written words to be a representation of who we are; while we might “supplement” this image with avatars or pictures we choose to share, our words are most significant. However, many internet users do not view cyberspace communication as written—they perceive it as talking or “chatting” (Giese). Therefore, just like a face-to-face conversation, while a person’s immediate appearance may give off a “first impression,” it is what she says over a period of time that will ultimately determine what a person thinks about her.
So if communicating online is a conversation, how exactly do we “talk” on the internet? And how do we do it clearly, without being misunderstood or hurting others’ feelings? The dynamics of online communication are varied—it is very often less formal than other forms of written communication, and it is conducted without audible or visual cues; we must express emotion textually; and we have to establish rules to govern these communications.
Less Formal Than “Ordinary” Written Communication
Online communication is not as formal as ordinary written communication because speed is considered more important than correct grammar or spelling. That this form of communication is viewed as “talking” heightens one’s sense of urgency.
If a person types too slowly or thinks too long about what he wants to say, he can get lost in the conversation. “The written word on the net is built for speed, not for show” (Geise). Therefore, it is not uncommon to see typographical, spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors within a text. In some textual environments where HTML is not possible, a person may use asterisks or capital letters for emphasis.
Even more important to note is that abbreviations have emerged from cyber communications—a “lexicon of acronyms” that “are commonly understood and serve to save time” (Geise). One need only spend some time in a chat room to be exposed to many of these acronyms, and it doesn’t take long to either figure out what they mean in context or for a frustrated “newbie” to ask someone what she means when she says “lol” (“laughing out loud”).
Many common acronyms include “brb” (“be right back”—something exclusive to internet chat, as someone at another computer may not know that you plan to be away from your keyboard for a few minutes to get a drink in the kitchen unless you tell him") and “btw” (“by the way”). The most significant aspect of the unimportance of formal written rules is that speed, not form, counts—as long as the message is clear, many of these “errors” are forgiven (Giese). Many younger individuals who have been exposed to computer communication from an early age don’t put much thought into this sort of writing—it comes naturally to them.
Again, if a message is clear enough to be understood by its recipient, it is effective communication, even if words are misspelled or are shortened (such as “u” for “you” or acronyms), capitals and punctuations are rare, and typos are frequent.
Online Communication Has Its Own Rules
Communicating on the internet may resemble communicating face-to-face, but it has its own set of rules. Once a person feels comfortable communicating online, he will learn the rules as he goes. Learning the rules online may not seem as awkward as a social gathering, but it does take some time. However, younger computer users—those who have been “plugged in” from an early age—seem to have no problems at all communicating online.
Resources:
Giese, Mark. “Self Without Body: Textual Self-Representation in an Electronic Community.” First Monday: Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Internet. Volume 3. <http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/issue/view/91>
This is the second article of a series. First article in this series: How We Represent Ourselves on the Internet
Online
|
More in Technology
Latest Articles