The Influence of Social Networks and Social Groups
In past decades and even centuries, people had to write letters, call, or meet face-to-face to communicate with others. Communication was personal but limited in the times before computers and the World Wide Web. Things have changed, and most cannot decide if it was for better or for worst. There are two sides to every story, including both good and bad sides to social networks, their influences on their members, and theirs purposes in society. From experiences alone, both the positive and the negative sides of social networking exist and in many ways. With research, the truth about social networking becomes that much more clear. Along with the ups and downs of social networking, social groups themselves leave a mark on the adolescence of the new world.
|
|
In the world of hash tags and statuses, one of the negative elements of social networking is the rise of “opinion leaders”. People who use their means of internet connection to post their ‘opinions’ of many varying topics and events. Being the ones who post the most and gain the most followers, others tend to follow and be influenced by these ‘leaders’ and pay attention to every word they have to say. In better terms, “The digital realm increasingly recognizes the relevance of ‘opinion leaders’ or influential users: those who, through their online activity (publishing tweets and blog posts, updating social networks status, recommending readings, etc.) create or filter content to people over whom they exert personal influence,” (Serrano-Puche 1). Serrano-Puche explains in his words how these people grab the attention of the masses through their simple updates, attracting those who, even online, have the need to follow a leader. These followers stay alert for the posts and the tweets to stay just as informed as their ‘leader’, never being positively sure for what they are reading or seeing is the truth, a lie, or pointless blabber. These ‘leaders’ use their forms of internet connections to not only make friends – in some cases – but to gain supporters and fans who hang on their every word, whether they realize if what they say can be strongly influential to their readers or not. In other words, these “opinion leaders” can also be seen as “attention seekers” who would post anything and everything if they could receive the attention they lack out of cyber space, or continue to receive the attention they already passively demand in reality.
Though the topic of “opinion leaders” may seem very negative when it comes to the truth behind it and what it could possibly mean for the society, this form of communication can serve a positive cause. Social networking is the ideal way of getting a point or message across large numbers in the course of minutes, even seconds. In some cases, this could be viewed as a ‘con’ because of possible encouraging of bad mannerisms and actions. What most do not consider, is that to every ‘con’, there is a ‘pro’, even if the balance is not always perfect between the two. According to Gyorgy Korniss, “…there is evidence that interpersonal channels constitute the dominant pathways for effecting individual behavior change, even when direct external influence is present,” (Korniss 1). When reading this introduction to the study of social networking influence, it could seem surprising how easily one individual, let alone a large number of the, could be influenced into changing their opinions or behavior based on what they read and hear on the web. However, there are positive outcomes that could be picked out of this excerpt. As the internet is becoming the main source of communication and broadcasting information, the incoming generations are tending to depend on new technology to be kept up to date on the happenings of the world. If they refuse to watch the television to get that source of information they need to be active citizens in their communities, companies and groups need to resort to making accounts and ‘pages’ on these networks to gain the support of the web followers. Through networks similar to Facebook, these companies and groups can easily send out a sentence or two and attract the attention of dozens within minutes, and hopefully the backing of those members with the help of a few pictures and pretty words.
|
Aside from the influences and possible changes in behavior of the members of these many networks, another negative of social networking is the draw of the network world and its addicting nature to the people who tune in. In a world where people would send intimate letters to communicate long distances, or make calls to be able to hear the voice of their friends or family, the fact that people could now easily communicate through a few typed words has greatly changed the people of the world as a whole. As Einstein once feared, he believed that the people of the future would embrace the power of technology and eventually cease the form of communication that is face-to-face interaction. According to these studies, the online world is becoming the average American’s only world, “Social networks and blogs continue to
|
dominate Americans’ time online, now accounting for nearly a quarter of total time spent on the Internet,” (Nielsen). Do not be surprised, for it should be proven true if one was to look around and see the many individuals who tune into the World Wide Web in some way, by phone, tablet, or laptop. Many people connect to the internet, and many of those log into social networks to post a status or tweet an important – or sometimes pointless – article of information to their friends. That is only for a quarter of their time spent on the internet. What do they do for the other three quarters, and if they spend hours online, what could they possibly be doing for a quarter of those hours on a social networking site after already posting their daily update? When Einstein predicted we would embrace technology, he was definitely not expecting such an embrace of a world that only exists behind a screen.
Leaving the world of social networking behind, the universe of social groups comes into play. Although many a person would be willing to deny that they are influenced by their peers, it happens more often than not. When a person chooses to ‘hang out’ with a specific group, they are choosing to follow the actions of the group as a whole. They see one doing something, see another following along, seeing another three repeat the action, followed by another three, and they are pressured into playing ‘follow the leader’. Most would demand it was peer pressure, most say it was all their choice and no one had to influence them to preform the action, but most of the time it is all mental pressure of seeing others doing something they have not yet decided to try. One action would be alcohol use among friends in early adolescence. Studies say, “Adolescents’ drinking behavior tends to be similar to their friends’ drinking behavior. This similarity has been attributed to both partner selection and peer influence processes,” (Steglich 1). Behavior is something in a person that is often influenced by their environment. If one wants to follow in the steps of clean slates and pure intentions, the path is always filled with people with the same desires and goals, who do not want to be brought down by impure thoughts or actions. If one does not care for future outcomes, they tend to choose according to popularity and appearance, not from judge of character. By surrounding one’s self with a specific group of people, you choose the person you want to be, and determine the actions you want to take. Therefore if there is ever discovered that adolescent drinking hits an increase, a main reason would be the grouping of those who want to be people who would follow in that path.
Along with the mimicking of behaviors, humans also tend to mimic basic physical mannerisms and gestures of those around them. Mimicking of others in a group goes even beyond simple actions, border lining the effect of mimicking movement like that of a mime. To have a copycat of sorts just because of constant time in one’s presence alone. Many have determined, “…people automatically mimic others’ behaviors when perceiving or interacting with them. We copy the facial expressions, non-verbal mannerisms, and pupil size of others,” (Loersch 1). To think, just by being around someone for a range of time, a person could come out acting in similar ways to a person they were never like before. This could be viewed as either positive or negative, depending on the types of mannerisms.
|
|
In any way that someone could possibly see these influences and facts behind them, they could be both positive and negative. When it comes to social networks and social groups, there will always be an argument about they could be harmful for the individual, only to have a following argument about the usefulness or the need for both social topics. As the world continues to develop, we can only pray that the negatives would right themselves so that there would not have to be arguments on whether it is harmful or damaging to the public.
Sources
-Bennett, Shea. “Social Media Bigger And More Influential Than Ever, Reveals Q3 Nielsen Report [INFOGRAPHIC]”. Rev. of The Social Media Report, by Nielson. WebMediaBrands, 13 September 2012. Web. 26 November 2012.
-Korniss, Gyorgy. "Evolution Of Opinions On Social Networks In The Presence Of Competing Committed Groups." Plos ONE 7.3 (2012): 1-9. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.
-Loersch, Chris. Elsevier Inc. The influence of social groups on goal contagion. Elsevier Inc., 2008. PDF file.
-Serrano-Puche, Javier. "HERRAMIENTAS WEB PARA LA MEDICIÓN DE LA INFLUENCIA DIGITAL: ANÁLISIS DE KLOUT Y PEERINDEX. (Spanish)." El Profesional De La Información 21.3 (2012): 298-303. Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Oct. 2012.
-Steglich, Christian. "Friendship And Alcohol Use In Early Adolescence: A Multilevel Social Network Approach." Journal Of Research On Adolescence (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 21.2 (2011): 475-487. Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Oct. 2012.
-Bennett, Shea. “Social Media Bigger And More Influential Than Ever, Reveals Q3 Nielsen Report [INFOGRAPHIC]”. Rev. of The Social Media Report, by Nielson. WebMediaBrands, 13 September 2012. Web. 26 November 2012.
-Korniss, Gyorgy. "Evolution Of Opinions On Social Networks In The Presence Of Competing Committed Groups." Plos ONE 7.3 (2012): 1-9. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.
-Loersch, Chris. Elsevier Inc. The influence of social groups on goal contagion. Elsevier Inc., 2008. PDF file.
-Serrano-Puche, Javier. "HERRAMIENTAS WEB PARA LA MEDICIÓN DE LA INFLUENCIA DIGITAL: ANÁLISIS DE KLOUT Y PEERINDEX. (Spanish)." El Profesional De La Información 21.3 (2012): 298-303. Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Oct. 2012.
-Steglich, Christian. "Friendship And Alcohol Use In Early Adolescence: A Multilevel Social Network Approach." Journal Of Research On Adolescence (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 21.2 (2011): 475-487. Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Oct. 2012.