
Blurring the boundaries
Jill Smolowe 1995 asserts that the vast majority of people surfing the Internet and using computer-mediated communications CMC are there 8220;in search of social interaction, not just sterile information8221; and that 80 per cent are looking for 8220;contact and commonality, companionship and community8221;.
Furthermore, Parks and Floyd 1996 showed that personal relationships conducted via CMC are quot;commonquot;, with just over 60 per cent of people in their sample reporting that they have formed a personal relationship with someone they had initially contacted through a Usenet newsgroup. I do not see how anyone can say that a community is not possible via CMC, that personal relationships are not happening. They most certainly are.
In fact, people are intrigued by CMC personal relationships because the technology is still new. These relationships are entering a realm of curiosity and popularity which is due to the relative quot;newnessquot; and apparent exotic flavour of the phenomenon. Itis even pervading our popular fiction. A 1996 novel by Stephanie D. Fletcher, E-Mail: A Love Story, consists of electronic posts sent and received by the protagonist, including quot;emotionally volatilequot; ones to electronic lovers: 8220;While these relationships are not real, the consequences are.8221;
As for the debate over the efficacy of CMC, Wellman and Gulia assert that the quot;dueling dualistsquot; on opposite sides of the CMC debate are feeding off each other, quot;using the unequivocal assertions of the other side as foils for their own arguments. Their statements of enthusiasm or criticism leave little room for the moderate, mixed outcomes that may really be the situationquot;.
CMC is a social phenomenon. It is about people communicating with other people, in any way they can. As Baym 1995 argues: quot;CMC not only lends itself to social uses but is, in fact, a site for an unusual amount of social creativity8230; Social realities are created through interaction as participants draw on language and the resources available tomake messages that serve their purposes.quot;
In conclusion, CMC quot;blursquot; traditional boundaries between interpersonal and mass communication, allowing for quot;new opportunities and risks for the way individuals relate to one anotherquot; Parks and Floyd, 1996; Lea amp; Spears, 1995.
In recent CMC scholarship, this blurring and traversing of boundaries has been debated and misunderstood as a negative phenomenon, concentrating on what CMC does not offer rather than what it does, and rather than looking at the positive possibilities and outcomes. The quot;virtual communityquot; is not a mythic land of milk and honey, but neither is it any more dangerous, hostile, or unwelcoming than quot;real lifequot;.
Excerpted from Computer Mediated Communications Magazine8217;. The complete article is at december.com/cmc/mag/1998/may/chenault.html. The author can be contacted at chenaultmhd1.moorhead.msus.edu.