In my
writing classes, I hope to challenge my students to critically consider the
topics we discuss, and learn to see themselves as capable of expressing
intelligent, informed ideas on them. In truth, this does not always happen, but
I can hope. Sometimes I wonder if the topics I present them with are too
difficult—and then I remind myself that they’ll learn more from the challenge.
Recently I’ve been thinking about tackling the writing assignments I give them
myself. For lack of less-compelling things to right about (Kmart is so boring
right now), I’ve decided I’ll start tonight.
The first
essay assignment was this: Read an excerpt from S. Craig Watkins’ book, The Young and the Digital. From there,
identify an issue, formulate an opinion on the topic, locate a second source,
and draft an APA-style essay that accomplishes 3 goals: summarizes each
article, rhetorically analyzes the pieces side-by-side to identify similarities
and differences, and draws conclusions about the topic from the research.
I’m not
going to do the assignment in its entirety.
I don’t have the time right now to locate another source on a topic.
Instead, I’m going to look at the gist of the argument Watkins presents and
offer discussion.
The excerpt
that we read was, I believe, from the introduction to the book. One key thing
to note about this book is that is was published in 2009, with much of the
research Watkins and his assistants conducted taking place in 2007. This is
significant because Watkins discusses social networking sites, specifically
considering Myspace and Facebook. Before I discuss the relevancy of his
information, though, it would be helpful to first explain his premise.
Using
several examples, the most memorable being that of a cartoon drawing of a dog,
Watkins seeks to call in to question many people’s belief that online social
networking has changed the way people interact socially—specifically that it
removes racial, economic, and geographic barriers. He argues against those that
would say that sites like Facebook and Myspace have made the world less
segregated, mainly challenging the belief that by interacting over a computer
screen, people are less likely to discriminate in ways we have in the past. In
fact, he even goes so far as to suggest that Facebook (more so than Myspace)
actually creates more fractured communities than before. Because it is easier
to ignore or dismiss a profile than a real person, our online interaction in
some case may be, in fact, more segregated that our real-life lives.
Watkins
makes a fairly compelling argument, with much of his information coming from
surveys he both conducts and cites. He interviews the people who use social
networking the most: college-aged kids. The problem I see with his research, at
least from the small excerpt we read, is that his sources are largely
homogenous. Only rarely does he cite the opinion of a non-white, non-college
student. Or at least, if he does, he does not clarify the person’s
demographics.
After
reading the essay, many of my students—from several different countries,
ethnicities, and socio-economic backgrounds—vehemently disagreed with him.
Things
like, “Of course he’s wrong. I can be friends with whoever I want on Facebook.
It’s easier to get to know all different kinds of people online,” were common
reactions. To this, I would respond, “Of course you can. No one is saying that you can’t.
What Watkins is saying is that you don’t.”
Again, many
students vocally disagreed: “That’s not true,” they would argue. “I’m white,
but I have black friends on Facebook,” or vice versa. Again, I respond, “I’m
sure you do. But how many people are you friends with on Facebook are people you
would not have befriended in real
life?”
Because in
essence, race and other factors stripped away, that is what Watkins argues: We
still only befriend those online that we would normally befriend in real life.
Which in most cases happens to be people who bear significant similarities to
ourselves (such as race, class, location).
You may
remember that earlier I mentioned that Watkins’ book was published in 2009, and
much of his research conducted in 2007. I bring this up again because as an
academic and an avid social network user, I question whether the data he would
collect now would corroborate his earlier studies. As an optimist, I want to
believe that things have changed. That his argument that Facebook is only for
the college-enrolled is outdated because Facebook, now, is open to the public,
where it had not been when he was doing his original research. But now,
perhaps, that the demographic has been allowed
to shift, it has. But even if more people are on the site, and the type of user
has diversified, I wonder if his claims about who we choose to socialize with
online have changed. Even though there is a larger diversity of people, are we
still largely socializing with a restricted type of people? I’d be interested to see
if more recent research has been conducted on the topic, and whether it
supports or contradicts Watkins.
I,
personally, am a bit ashamed by the poor diversity of my friends list. Mostly
friends from college a few from high school, coworkers, and family. Not many
people that I wouldn’t have come across in my everyday life. And without knowing
specifics, I would imagine that many of them share a similar background with
me: white, middle-class, college-educated, Midwestern. There are exceptions of
course, but shockingly few of them. Just from my own personal experience, it is
possible that Watkins’ argument would hold today. Perhaps the internet, and
social networks, are not the barrier-eliminators many want to believe they are.
