Critical Writing Assignment: Do internet social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook actually promote social interaction between people or do these sites interfere with real social connection among people?

Only six handshakes separate a European person from Aboriginals of Australia, from acquaintance with the Queen, Bill Gates, or Madonna. This is so-called small-world effect, or the theory of six handshakes. Its author, Stanley Milgram proved that any 2 people on Earth are familiar with each other, figuratively speaking, in 6 handshakes. Social networks allow to observe this phenomenon in practice. In pre-Internet times they were just networks of human relationships. The concept of "social network" as such includes a certain circle of friends of a person, where the person is the center of network, his friends are the branches of network, and relationships between these people are social links.

Social networks have been constructed as the means of establishing and maintaining contacts and meetings in order to build online communities of people with similar interests and activities, which could be more convenient for exchanging messages, following the latest trends, joining interest groups, participating in real life events. A curious survey showed that 62% of people aged 16 and older believe that dwelling in virtual environment is an integral part of their lives: it’s rapid, convenient and informative (Watts 45-47). Internet and social network sites in particular have become essential for many people; they allow downloading and sharing music, watching videos, expressing oneself.

However, every coin has another side. Social networking sites have also become the means of devastation of the notion of friendship. In social networking, the concept of friendship is based rather on quantity than quality: while people make 200, 300 and more friends online, this is not equal to having one real friend, able to understand, help, or argue, as it often happens in real life. In this way, for hundreds of people these sites create an illusion that the real life - ordinary or unsuccessful to different extents - can be redeemed by the abundance of "friendly faces" on the Internet.

The substitution of reality is a fairly serious side effect. A person gradually stops distinguishing virtual communication from the real life, starts reacting badly to other people's words and religiously believing confession made in the network. The danger of virtual communication lies in the risk of misunderstanding words as the major element of this communication: while being interpreted in a different sense, they typically lead to social conflicts. But the point is that people are arranged in the way that they perceive 87% of information through non-verbal communication; words do not play such an important role (Watts 91-102).

Social networks can also cause addiction. Getting used to posting blogs and spending day time viewing other people's photos for a long time, it is simply impossible to abandon the Internet. In most case, it is difficult to control how much time is actually spent in social networking sites. Any virtual simulation forces to live two lives, because of which a person becomes less sociable, more withdrawn and irritable. The addictive force of online social networks is strengthened by the factor that the virtual reality abandons in people potentially waiting for a person, people who know how to feel, react spontaneously, and even love.

At the same time, sociologists studying social networks indicate that people dangerously mislead themselves, believing that social networks make them more independent. Active members of social communities sincerely believe that they are freeing themselves from the dictates of the media, when they go for "alternative news" on social sites, or make a more independent choice of music, instead of choice imposed by music channels. But scientists say that the format of social networking actually eliminates the possibility of independence (a distinct lemming effect is observed in all experiments without exception), because independence means self-judgment, but the whole sense of existence of social networks is receiving information about the reaction of other people.

Meanwhile, this psychosis obtains massive scales. Social networks have become the principle of life for many people and their only connection with the outside world; so their friends just have to be there, as it is often the only more or less adequate way to communicate. But according to the observations of scientists, biological and physiological processes in humans occur in different ways depending on whether a person is inside the real society or uses the latest electronic communication systems (Notley 1208-1227).

British biologist Aric Sigman says that social networking sites and the ability to communicate in real time online has led to the situation, when people start spending very little time for meetings and are conducting more time in the environment of social networks, where they can realize themselves the way they want.

According to the British scientist, an excessive enthusiasm for social networks on the Internet can harm health because of the reduction of communication with real people. In particular, the lack of communication can negatively affect immune system, hormonal balance, the work of arteries and thought processes, which in the long term increases the risk of the emergence and development of such diseases as cancer, cardiovascular disease and dementia. Thought the initial idea of social networks is to contribute to the social activity of people, in reality the contemporary society is witnessing something quite different (Sigman 14-20).

British scientists have many times raised concerns about social networks. For example, last year at the meeting of the British Royal College of Psychiatrists, it was suggested that the social network produces distorted perception of reality. According to psychiatrists, the generation of 1990s, which doesn’t know the world without the Internet, can develop potentially dangerous view on the surrounding world and one’s own personality. Children accustomed to social networks from early childhood, may have difficulties in real relationships with people, because they know little about subtle nuances of facial expressions, tone of voice and body language. Thus, social networks sites are just an illusion of communication substituting reality, while virtual communication is good only as a supplement to the real one.

One can’t help acknowledging that the improvement of communication models by means of social networks can significantly save time and finance resources, presenting a kind of concentrate: spending less time on communication and getting in 5 minutes a flow of information equal to 5 personal meetings, surely gives more time for personal life. The only question is whether people are able to accurately use such achievements of civilization, as social networking sites.  

Work Cited:

Notley, Tanya. “Young People, Online Networks, and Social Inclusion”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14.4 (2009): 1208-1227. Print.

Sigman, Aric. “Well Connected?: The Biological Implications of 'Social Networking'”, Biologist 56.1 (2009): 14-20. Print.

Watts, Duncan J. Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003. Print.