Can Facebook be considered a nation? A recent article in the Economist suggests just that. The article examines Facebook as an imagined community that developed through horizontal ties. Although Facebook has no land, army, or governing body the article ponders whether or not those ties are necessary in defining a Facebook nation. Mark Zucherburg, the creator of Facebook can be compared to the leader of this nation.
The Karim reading suggested that a nation has a set of myths and rituals to qualify as a nation. Many Facebook users consider checking Facebook as a ritual, and a shared experience. Reading newspapers, and books has been a ritualistic experience, which defines a nation. Newspaper readership is on the decline while Facebook usage has reached over 500 million. Facebook exists internationally, and has connected users worldwide, is this the future of nations?
As was discussed in class nations require a shared sense of destiny, I don’t believe this exists on a platform like Facebook. Although users engage in a shared sense of ritual, the actions are very individualistic. Facebook users in Zambia, do not have shared sense of destiny with users in Canada. When Egyptian Facebook members used the site to mobilize the population, their national ties were increased, but the Facebook community could not share in this experience.
I think the idea of Facebook nation is interesting way to define what one considers a nation, although a true nation is a long time coming.
Ginnie, the article in the Economist is really interesting. I was thinking about some of the characteristics of Facebook that make it nation-like. You mention that checking the site has become a ritual. There are other rituals associated with it such as wishing friends happy birthday. Facebook has also spawned a language of sorts with vocabulary such as "liking" and "status updates."
ReplyDeleteI think you are right that the Facebook "nation" lacks a shared sense of destiny. It also lacks a history. For this reason I like the analogy of sports fan bases as nations. Redskins fans for example have a common past and their goal is always a Super Bowl win.
I think it is interesting way to define a nation, and I do think there is a bit of a shared history-although its not that impressive. I started using Facebook the year it was created 2004, when it was only open for people with a valid college email address; since then the site has changed a lot. Your wall was not a prominent feature, you could only put up one picture, there was no newsfeed, or like button. I can reminisce with users about "the old days" and I suspect with all the changes happening recently it will be the same for users now and ones that join later. I do think the element missing is shared destiny, the only unity I can see on Facebook is against changes made to the cite.
ReplyDeleteGinnie:
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree that Facebook can be a considered a nation in the context of International Communication. This medium gives individuals the ability and opportunity to define their own destiny. Specifically, when it comes to civic participation, individuals have been able to advocate in a way that would not be accepted through the traditional forms of protest in their own nation. Not only can individuals express themselves in regards to events going on in their own country, but they can also be a part of the international conversation about some thing that happens thousands of miles away from where they live. Facebook offers open public space that is not so strictly governed,which makes it a nation that embraces intellectual dialogue.