Abstract
Technologically networked social forms are broad, extensive and in demand. The rapid development and growth of web 2.0, or the social web, is evidence of the need and indeed hunger for social connectivity: people are searching for many and varied ways of enacting being-together. However, the ways in which we think of, research and write about network(ed) sociality are relatively recent and arguably restricted, warranting further critique and development. This article attempts to do several things: it raises questions about the types of sociality enacted in contemporary techno-society; critically explores the notion of the networked individual and the focus on the individual evident in much of the technology and sociality literature and asks questions about the place of the social in these discussions. It argues for a more well-balanced and multilevelled approach to questions of sociality in networked societies. The article starts from the position that possibilities enabled/afforded by the technologies we have in place have an effect upon the ways in which we understand being in the world together and our possible actions and futures. These possibilities are more than simply supplementary; in many ways they are transformative. The ways in which we grapple with these questions reveals as much about our understandings of sociality as it does about the technologies themselves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
He also notes the centrality of databases in this process.
- 2.
‘Network’ is used while noting reservations about some of the normative claims associated with networks more generally (for example, see Barney, 2004).
- 3.
There is a rapidly growing body of literature on the topic of mobile technologies and the possibilities they create for different social practices. See for example, Larsen, Urry, and Kay (2008).
- 4.
See Mascheroni (2007: 528) for a study of backpackers as a more extreme example.
- 5.
Other attributes are inferred with the lifting of spatial restrictions: increased freedom and choice for the individual from social constraints and pressures; more heterogeneity, etc.
- 6.
I recognize that each of these terms have their own specific conceptual meanings and inferences; however, there is something here that I am trying to suggest requires addressing that is larger than the individual, that is constitutive of shared horizons or understandings. These fall within the various discourses and interests of these terms.
- 7.
Here, ‘community’ is thought of more broadly than evidenced in many community studies. Instead, Nancy talks of community as an ontological relation that exists between singular beings, is always existent but is affected by social and political structures through which they are engaged.
- 8.
For example, some community and public sphere literature is criticised for assumptions of homogenous memberships and an inability to deal with questions of difference. Totalising, reductive and determinist claims are made too about earlier community writings, but also potentially about some network literatures. Work is being undertaken in a number of spheres that seeks to reconcile the possibility of multiple pluralities and the possibility for solidarity (for example, Fenton, 2008).
- 9.
Castells, Tubella, Sancho, Diaz de Isla, and Wellman (2004) note that the Catalonians use the internet predominantly for information gathering and not social practices. While their article lacks an explanation as to how social practices are understood, this is still an interesting finding and suggests the need for further research into different social and cultural uses of the technology for sociality and what this means for intersubjective practices.
References
Bakardjieva, M. (2003). Virtual togetherness: an every-day life perspective. Media, Culture & Society, 25, 291–313.
Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Linked: The new science of networks. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
Barney, D. (2004). The Network Society. Key concepts series. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Baym, N. (2002). Interpersonal life online. In L. A. Lievrouw & S. Livingstone (Eds.), Handbook of new media: Social shaping and consequences of ICTs (pp. 62–76). London: Sage Publications.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1996). Individualization and “Precious Freedoms”: Perspectives and controversies of a subject-orientated sociology. In P. Heelas, S. Lash, & P. Morris (Eds.), Detraditionalization: Critical reflections on authority and identity (pp. 23–48). Cambridge, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Boyd, D. (2006). Friends, friendsters, and top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites. First Monday, 11(12). Retrieved December 6, 2006, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/boyd/
Calhoun, C. (1998). The public good as a social and cultural project. In W. W. Powell & E. S. Clemens (Eds.), Private action and the public good (pp. 20–35). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Castells, M. (2001). The internet galaxy: Reflections on the internet, business, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Castells, M., Tubella, I., Sancho, T., Diaz de Isla, M. I., & Wellman, B. (2004). Social structure, cultural identity and personal autonomy in the practice of the internet: The network society in Catalonia. In M. Castells (Ed.), The network society: A cross-cultural perspective (pp. 233–249). London: Edward Elgar.
DiMaggio, P., Hargitti, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307–336.
Fenton, N. (2008). Mediating solidarity. Global Media and Communication, 4(1), 37–57.
Fischer, C. S. (1992). America calling: A social history of the telephone to 1940. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Gochenour, P. H. (2006). Distributed communities and nodal subjects. New Media & Society, 8(1), 33–51.
Hampton, K. (2004). Networked sociability online, off-line. In M. Castells (Ed.), The network society: A cross-cultural perspective (pp. 217–232). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and internet connectivity effects. Information, Communication and Society, 18(2), 125–247.
Howard, P. N. (2002) Network ethnography and the hypermedia organization: new media, new organizations, new methods. New Media & Society, 4(4), 550–574.
Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53 (9), 1017–1031. Retrieved July 19, 2001, from http://www.apa.org/journals/amp/amp5391017.html
Larsen, J., Urry, J., & Kay, A. (2008). Coordinating fFace-to-face meetings in mobile network societies. Information, Communication and Society, 11(5), 640–658.
Mascheroni, G. (2007). Global nomads’ network and mobile sociality: Exploring new media uses on the move. Information, Communication and Society, 10(4), 527–546.
Monge, P. R., & Contractor, N. S. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Nancy, J.-L. (1991). The inoperative community. P. Connor (Ed.), P. Connor, W. Garbus, M. Holland, & S. Sawhney (Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Nancy, J.-L. (1997). The sense of the world (J. Librett, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Poster, M. (1995). The second media age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Rice, R. E. (2002). Primary issues in internet use: Access, civic and community involvement, and social interaction and expression. In L. A. Lievrouw & S. Livingstone (Eds.), Handbook of new media: Social shaping and consequences of ICTs (pp. 105–135). London: Sage Publications.
Silverstone, R. (2003). Proper distance: Toward an ethics for cyberspace. In G. Liestol, A. Morrison, & T. Rasmussen (Eds.), Digital media revisited: Theoretical and conceptual innovations in digital domains (pp. 469–490). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Taylor, C. (1991). Ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Taylor, C. (2004). Modern social imaginaries. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internet. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Wacjman, J. (2008). Life in the fast lane? Towards a sociology of technology and time. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(1), 59–77.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Wellman, B. (2001a). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293, 2031–2034.
Wellman, B. (2001b). Physical place and cyberplace: The rise of personalized networking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(2), 227–252.
Wellman, B., & Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). The internet in everyday life. Oxford: Blackwell.
Willson, M. (1997). Community in the abstract: A political and ethical dilemma? In D. Holmes (Ed.), Virtual politics: Identity and community in cyberspace (pp. 145–162). London: Sage Publications.
Willson, M. (2006). Technically together: Rethinking community within techno-society. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Wittel, A. (2001). Toward a network sociality. Theory Culture and Society, 18(6), 51–76.
Woolgar, S. (2004). Reflexive internet? The british experience of new electronic technologies. In C. Manuel (Ed.), The network society: A cross-cultural perspective (pp. 125–142). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Robyn Mayes, Marta Celletti, Susan Leong, Teodor Mitew, and Jeremy Hunsinger for their helpful comments on various drafts. She would also like to acknowledge the support given by Curtin University’s Research and Development strategic research grant scheme, enabling the time to write this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Willson, M. (2009). The Possibilities of Network Sociality. In: Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L., Allen, M. (eds) International Handbook of Internet Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9789-8_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9789-8_30
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-9788-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-9789-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)