More about people v. technology (and which side Google seems to be on)

I’ve found that after I get a few pages into any article we read, I always go back to see when the article was written. Usually I’ll read a line and think, “That doesn’t happen anymore…” and then realize I’m reading something written almost 10 years ago!

I thought the Galston paper was the most comprehensive, but it was published in 1999! I like how he described similarities between the effects that both the Internet and television had on society; Weeks has the same point of view, discussing how the Internet is developing faster than social interactions can adapt. Galston also spent a good portion defending his argument that, “[Contemporary American society] … is structured by … individual choice, and the longing for community.” My first thought was, “Isn’t that what many Web 2.0 components are built for?” That of course, was when I looked up the date of the article. From that context, Web 2.0 technologies would certainly be considered socially driven, and Galston’s views on “volunteer communities,” low entry and exit barriers, etc., would make him a social determinist.

Bigge, 7 years later, takes a different point of view. He describes SNS’s such as MySpace or Facebook to be a “necessity, rather than an option.” He cites examples where users almost felt required to have an online presence; Rosen’s data on the virtual spaces of Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama agree with this analysis. Bigge describes those that resist joining SNS’s and blogs parallel to people fighting an addiction, further emphasizing the necessary nature and power of these systems. His paper sides with the school of technological determinism, and he makes strong arguments that it is technology in the driver’s seat, and users are forced to climb aboard or risk becoming a social outcast, both among friends and co-workers.

I like the social v. technical argument, freely admit to leaning on the social side myself, and will discuss it a bit more, but I suppose I will try to tie in the remaining readings. I liked the LaRose article, also partly because it was written so long ago (it’s becoming easy to think of 8 years as “so long ago,” especially in Internet time). In studying whether the Internet can be linked to depression, the paper cites many different examples both supporting and contradicting the theory. In the end, their study shows that Internet communication can actually alleviate depression in certain cases, and that depression might be caused by stressful interactions with the Internet itself, rather than other people online. I’d accept those results, because it also supports a socially deterministic point of view. If people were really going online because technology was driving them, it could certainly be linked to negative experiences, of which depression could be a result. It is simple to see that performing actions which you did not want to do, or were forced into by the devices themselves could clash negatively with the users. On the other hand, if social forces, such as a desire for interactions, community, or need to be heard, rather than the technology, pushed for people to get online and blog, join SNS’s, etc., then the actions would be more natural. LaRose’s results showing that the interaction with the Internet (i.e. HCI issues, connections problems) could be the major component in stress now make much more sense.

As for joining an online community, I signed up on http://androidcommunity.com (username bacardi), a portal for Google’s mobile operating system. Obviously, I just recently purchased the T-Mobile G1, which uses Android, so I’ve been meaning to get involved in a community and find out how best to use Google’s newest toy. I want to post 2 things that make sense with what I’ve been writing about.

The first requires a little bit of background. The G1 phone was released with some disappointing features, or lack thereof. For example, while there was a full querty keyboard, there was no virtual keyboard that some users have grown fond of. Another is the lack of video support on the phone. Both are found in many other similar phones, and would otherwise make the G1 an unattractive buy. Fortunately, the Android operating system is an open source project. Not only that, but Google has make it scalable, and promised to provide support for Android, especially as it gets used in more mobile phones. With that in mind, the newest update (codenamed “Cupcake”) for Android will actually include an option to use a virtual keyboard, and also have support for video. The important thing to note here is that it is not HTC, the phone creator, who is updating the phone features, but rather a joint effort between Google and the Android community. The fact that Android is open source fits the bill of a Web 2.0 culture which leverages user participation into creating a better product. Here is the link describing Cupcake’s keyboard features: http://androidcommunity.com/android-cupcake-screenshots-show-new-qwerty-settings-20090123/

The second is a little less exciting, and I lied about it having something directly to do with what I’ve been writing about. I joined in a discussion about the new video updates coming with Cupcake. To be more specific, it’s actually someone’s blog on the website. The site apaprently has separate components for discussions, pictures posts, blogs, social groups, and knowledge base. However, it seems to all tie together, and sometimes it’s difficult to tell where I am. I posted a simple question here: http://androidcommunity.com/forums/blog.php?bt=437 and also in a community discussion here: http://androidcommunity.com/forums/f8/all-cupcake-rumors-11020/index28.html. It doesn’t quite relate to the social v. technical question, but I’m curious as to whether I’ll get more information from a community forum or individual user blog. I guess I’ll find out in a few days.