Social network: research subject search

    Having made an attempt to determine the content of the term “social network”, he only confirmed for himself the importance of this undertaking. The content is vague and is interpreted by different people in different ways. The work is endless.

    It turned out to be obvious that going through the description of the properties of a subjectively selected website is not productive. Firstly, another person can describe the same site in his own way or even take another site as an example; secondly, any property can be called into question as belonging to a social network. How to be Together, you can explore a subject that is common to researchers. But which site to take as a representative?

    And maybe the hype about social networks is exaggerated? Maybe in the future, those opportunities offered by the emerging social networks will be just a good tone for any site? As previously there were: a guest book, a forum. Maybe a social network is not a "chip", but a necessity? Perhaps this is the most suitable form for the Web, satisfying the human need to be similar to oneself?

    The demand for services organizing social networks is generated by the fact that people are social creatures, and the Network, as a product of man, will be infinitely improved in forms, embodying his aspirations. So they waited for a new form for eternal content - a social network.

    I don’t remember what happened before: either the guest and forums were screwed to the site, or at first they made independent sites out of them. But now, among the sites that provide the opportunity to create a social network, the same duality is observed: a social network is either an auxiliary opportunity or the main goal of the site.

    A person has the power to swap things and turn them upside down: a part can be a whole and a means a self-sufficient goal, as well as vice versa: a whole can be taken as a part, and the goal as a means. If the tool becomes the goal, then on this way the content is removed. More precisely, the content itself becomes this tool.

    Modern sites can be divided by what place they assign to sociality itself - the first or second.

    We get a range of sites:

    1. For collective projects, for example Wikipedia , in the first place the subject, not the relationship of the co-authors. But it is open to all.
    2. For an author’s blog, a network of co-authors is an important additional property, but only an additional one. When meeting like-minded people in the blog space, the development of interpersonal relationships towards the next type of web projects will be logical.
    3. For a thematic content project, the content of which is born by the team, the connection of the participants will be very important. In such a community, a black sheep will be a person who speaks off topic, even if he is respected in another field, as well as one who behaves asocially. It is possible that it will be appropriate to mention Habrahabr here.
    4. Odnoklassniki projects ,My Circle , although there is an object toodoo , but the bias is already being made on the connection itself. Hence the possibility of unity of people from various social and other strata for whom projects are suitable.
    5. In MySpace , Comby projects , the content is the connection between people, and therefore they are indifferent to the subject around which the connection is built. These services are suitable for everyone. True, it is necessary to make a reservation, since the absolutization of communication as an object in these projects does not reach the final goal, the object is nevertheless required: there must be something to chat about.
    6. To its perfection, the idea of ​​communication as an absolute goal is embodied in mamba - the dating machine. Communication and only communication matters. Communication is different and even intimate is exposed publicly. As the saying goes: “... why waste time in vain? At midnight at the barn? ”

    In my opinion, sites - social networks - are those that are of type 4 and 5. You can’t call everything where people interact call a social network. These two types of sites, probably, are indicative for the study of such a phenomenon on the Internet as a social network. The third type can most likely be called a professional network (of course, it is also social, but the emphasis here is on a special, specific community of people). Sixth is not a network at all. And 1 is not a network, but on the idea of ​​sociality.

    What is your opinion?

    Also popular now: