Face Invaders!

While Lori Andrews’s argument that Facebook is a nation is a hasty one, I’m less concerned with Facebook invading America than well, Facebook invading Americans. 

The idea of an electronic surrogate nation is a revolutionary one, and while it seems impossible for Facebook to function as an independent political entity-no matter how many millions or billions of users it has- a part of such a revolution is underway in the form of BitCoin.(I’ll post more about BitCoin in a separate post)

http://bitcoin.org/en/

For now, let’s consider Facebook where it (still) resides, in the social sphere. Facebook wants to function as an index of a person’s thoughts, feelings, and interests at a given moment. The premise is that a larger picture of the user’s identity can be assembled through viewing/reading what that user puts forward in the form of images, comments, and likes.   And that real-world context is no longer necessary to understand someone- instead you just follow look at what they post.

There’s an Orwellian view of the Internet regarding privacy, and the eradication of barriers between private and public information.  One aspect of this is the idea that we reveal too much to the Internet; that because of its ease of use and familiarity, the lines have blurred between what is to be shared widely, and what is only to be shared with a select few. An oft pointed to example is the job applicant whose Google search by HR, turned up embarrassing images or off-color postings: things they might censor in a real-world situation.

I think the sense of participation and community that the Facebook Nation encourages results I a dropping of barriers, moving us closer to a sense of intimacy with “friends”, and among users is hypnotic. We feel like we’re in a giant clubhouse, with all our friends watching us. We feel a sense of immediacy and comfort, as if we’re in a private sphere.  Who doesn’t want to be seen? Of course we posture a bit, and in subtle ways try to reimagine an idealized self.

I understand Andrews’ concerns about privacy on Facebook, but I think it’s a bit overblown.  While it’s true that Facebook users have little or no protection from prying eyes- or rather, from software programs collating your information to be sold for marketing purposes, and yes, there is no way for the average FB user to guard against that, it becomes a question of buyer (user) beware: how much critical information are you going to post? On a personal note, I try to avoid leaving a Google footprint, don’t personal matters on FB, and never conduct personal financial transactions online.

The real issue for me is how users edit themselves. We show other users what is good about us (and how tan we looked parasailing in Mazatlan) and obscure that which detracts from that, in hopes of persuading others to see us with positive regard - to “like” us.

In contrast with the physical world, there is a transmission delay in social media; this affords the user a chance to edit, to review and organize the information they wish to communicate and to then put their best foot forward. So what their friends see isn’t the real them, it’s an idealized version, whereas a real-time interaction doesn’t allow for censure and thus reveals more information (never minds the informational cues of body language, emotional state). So instead of saying “Unlike Vegas, what happens in Facebook doesn’t stay in Facebook,” I think a more appropriate phrase would be “What happens in your life doesn’t have to stay in your Facebook life”.

But then again, I really like your Facebook Self:

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/pleased-to-meet-the-facebook-version-of-you