Deconstructing Facebook by Rune Vejby
October 31st 2008 07:21
Category: No Category
The following text is copyrighted in the name of Rune Vejby and should not be reproduced without permission. Apologies for my inability to reproduce the images included in the Microsoft Word Document.
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical framework
2.1 Baudrillard and the hyperreal
2.2 Foucault and the panoptic society
3. Analysis
3.1 Facebook.com and hyperreality
3.1.1 Hyperreal symptoms
3.1.2 Effects on social interaction
3.2 Facebook.com and panopticism
3.2.1 Panoptic symptoms
3.2.2 Effects on social interaction
4. Discussion
5. Conclusion
1. Introduction
If you ask almost any individual in the Western world about what exactly constitutes human sociality, most people would probably include some aspect of online interaction in their definition; for example chat, e-mail, or interactions through online communities. Facebook.com can be considered part of the latter category; the web community – a social networking site – where users can design a personal profile and make it accessible for their online friends. The American-based website has only existed since 2004 but already managed to attract over 40 million users worldwide, and has become the world’s leading online networking community.
I decided to render Facbook.com my object of analysis in this paper as a result of both personal and scientific curiosity. My personal interest originates from my own use of the website and from the fact that most of my peers use it as well – many of them even on a daily basis. My scientific interest derives from a TV debate show on Danish television about contemporary cultural phenomena, where Facebook.com was the subject of discussion (“Smagsdommerne”, DR2, February 2008). Even though the participating debaters restricted themselves to merely present their own experiences with the website, and failed to consider its impact on cultural and social behaviour on a general plane, one participant produced an interesting comment: "Facebook allows me to be social without really being social. I can maintain contact with my peers but don’t need to interact with them in the real world" (my own translation). This sparked my interest in investigating the actual implications of Facebook on social interaction, and the nature of Facebook as a communicative tool. Hence, in this study I intend to study the contemporary sociocultural phenomenon Facebook.com, by subjecting it to cultural theories of hyperreality and panopticism. My aim is to be able to understand the nature of social interaction on Facebook in relation to “postmodern” cultural theories that identify simulation and surveillance as predominant concepts in contemporary society.
For the purpose of this study I have decided to limit my theoretical framework to include Jean Baudrillard’s conceptualization of the hyperreal as well as Michel Foucault’s theory of the panoptic society. Baudrillard’s theory will be applied on Facebook in order to assess to what extend, if any, his claim that modern society has replaced all reality and meaning with symbols and signs is also valid in relation to the process of social interaction. Has social interaction become hyperreal? I have included Foucault’s theory to better grasp the exact nature of Facebook as a social and cultural tool and to investigate the effects of surveillance and visibility on social interaction. To sum up, this study contains concise expositions of the theories by Baudrillard and Foucault (section 2), an analysis of Facebook.com based on the theoretical framework (section 3), and a brief discussion of my results (section 4).
2. Theoretical framework
Below I will investigate the hyperreality theory by Baudrillard (based on the English translation of his work Simulacra and Simulation) as well as the theory of the panoptic society by Foucault (in the English translation of Discipline and Punish). I intend to primarily expose the fundamental ideas of the two authors and not provide comprehensive summaries of their respective works as such, but rather single out the aspects of their theories that I find relevant for the purpose of my study of sociality and social interaction.
2.1 Baudrillard and the hyperreal
In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard argues that the referential relationship between the real and the copy has changed insofar as the copy is no longer a “faithful” representation of its real equivalent. He believes that the principle of equivalence of the sign and of the real has become utopian and hence that representation has been replaced by the process of simulation (Baudrillard, 1994: 6). Simulation abolishes the stable referential relationship between the real and the copy and places, instead, the copy – the simulacrum – as the actual truth; because it precedes the real and the real cannot “survive” it. However, since the simulacrum precedes the real it cannot be an actual copy and it becomes instead the real itself, i.e. the hyperreal (ibid: 1). Baudrillard identifies the hyperreal as “[…] the generation by models of a real without origin or reality […]” (ibid: 1), which he exemplifies by arguing that maps have preceded the territories that they illustrate. He cites an ancient fable where the Empire once created a map that was as large and detailed as the Empire itself. But as the Empire crumbled away, only the map – the simulation of the real – remained. Today, Baudrillard argues, maps are the actual reality; the truth that people believe in. They believe in the hyperreal, the map, while the original real, the actual territory, is crumbling away as a result of disuse. Baudrillard terms this the desert of the real.
The notion that modern society replaces reality and traditional referential relationships with a model of simulation, in which the simulacra creates a perceived reality, is basically the general premise of Baudrillard’s work. Throughout Simulacra and Simulation he provides examples of how this process of simulation functions in religion, science, and fiction, as well as in several other fields and environments. For the purpose of this study I will investigate Baudrillard’s evaluation of the simulated nature of media and communication, and the resulting effects on sociality. He argues that mediated information “[…] devours its own content. It devours communication and the social” (ibid: 80). This occurs for two reasons: firstly, rather than creating communication and meaning, it exhausts itself in the process of staging communication and meaning. In other words, mediated communication is a gigantic process of simulation invaded by “phantom content” such as nondirective interviews and listener/viewer participation, which ultimately serve to stage the desire of the audience and functions as a big simulacrum with the purpose of hiding the “obvious” reality. Hence, the hyperreal of mediated communication and meaning becomes more real than reality and that is how the real is abolished at the expense of the hyperreal (ibid: 81). Secondly, Baudrillard argues that this mise-en-scène of communication, the mass media and information pursues “[…] irresistible destructuration of the social” (ibid: 81). He claims that the dissolving of information leads to a dissolving of the social into a sort of nebulous state, and hence that the media does not produce socialization but rather the exact opposite, namely an implosion of sociality in the masses. In other words, Baudrillard’s general hypothesis regarding the significance and impact of media and information on communication seems to be that information neutralizes, or even destructs, meaning and signification. Essentially, this perspective on the role of the media contradicts the common held opinion that whoever is “[…] underexposed to the media is desocialized or virtually asocial”. (ibid: 80).
2.2 Foucault and the panoptic society
Under the headline panopticism, Foucault theorizes how modern society has become increasingly focused on surveillance and discipline, and how individuals are constantly visible even though they have simultaneously become more individualized. In Discipline and Punish, he constructs his theories on the basis of the philosopher Jeremy Bentham’s model of a penitentiary facility – the Panopticon – in which a tower with windows on all sides is placed in the middle of the construction, and provides complete visibility to a circular formation of cell blocks surrounding the tower. Each cell holds one prisoner. Every cell is illuminated and can be observed from the central guard tower, while the prisoners cannot see the guard in the tower nor communicate with fellow inmates. Hence, the prisoner "[…] is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication" (Foucault, 1977: 200). Accordingly, this “invisible“ nature of surveillance, and the isolation of prisoners, functions as a guarantee for sustaining order since prisoners are unable to plot or fight against each other. Foucault then expands this theory to be applicable on several levels in society and not merely as an architectural structure of a prison. He argues, for example, that the collective effect in schools has been replaced by separation of students which eliminates copying, noise chatter and waste of time. And the separation of workers abolishes theft, coalition and slow work. Hence, the main effect of the Panopticon, namely “[…] to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power” (ibid: 201), works in several societal institutions as well. According to Foucault, a panoptic setup secures constant efficiency and order because the “prisoner” can never be sure whether or not he is being observed by the "guard". In other words, this unequal gaze between prisoner and guard makes the former less likely to break rules since the risk of being observed exists permanently (ibid: 202).
But not only does the Panopticon enable the observer to surveil the prisoner, it also enables him to compare and draw up differences among medical patients, schoolchildren, workers or any other groups of people, and thereby to assess various characters and their attitudes. This adds a more functional perspective to the panoptic theory and enables the observer (for example an employer or a school teacher) to measure and calculate the efforts of each individual, and compare them to those of other isolated individuals. All movements, even the slightest ones, can be observed and all events are recorded (ibid: 197). To sum up the above notions, I understand the general idea of Foucault's exposition of the Panopticon to be that most hierarchical structures in society, for example hospitals, workplaces and schools have developed to resemble the structure of the Panopticon. Foucault perceives that modern societies have adopted this “light” way of disciplining people as a means to observe and normalize the respective institutions in a pervasive manner.
In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard also discusses the theory of the Panopticon, in particular in relation to the increasing importance of the media in modern society. He argues that reality TV (for example Big Brother and other similar shows that seek to portray the "real" life of a group of people) signifies a “[…] switch from the panoptic mechanism of surveillance […] to a system of deterrence, in which the distinction between the passive and the active is abolished […]” (Baudrillard, 1994: 29). In other words, he argues that panopticism has come to an end as a result of dissolving hierarchies. There is no longer an unequal gaze that indicates divisions of power or submission, because people are now looking at people - or rather, people are looking at themselves; people are the event. They are the source of information. According to Baudrillard, the media "mutates" the real into the hyperreal and can thereby no longer be considered the source of an absolute gaze (ibid: 29).
3. Analysis
This section is dedicated to the analysis of social interaction on Facebook.com in the light of the theories by Baudrillard and Foucault presented in the previous section. Before progressing to the actual analysis, I wish to briefly address the applicability of the theories on my object of analysis. While Baudrillard’s theory seems to be applicable in most cultural contexts (In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard himself puts everything from media and religion to science fiction into the hyperreal framework), Foucault’s theory specifically concerns itself with divisions of power in society and may initially be more complex to accommodate to the study of social interaction on the internet. However, I still believe that Foucault’s notions of hierarchical structures, surveillance and gazes will be beneficial for my analysis of sociality on Facebook.com since they enable me to study the implications of visibility and transparency on social interaction.
Furthermore, it should also be noted that neither Baudrillard nor Foucault addressed worldwide networking and internet in specific in their writings. However, I believe that the internet serves somewhat as a perfect paradigm both for the Foucauldian ideas of surveillance and visibility and, especially, as an example of a hyperreal environment in a Baudrillardian perspective. I perceive the internet as the ultimate hyperreal, or – to use one of Baudrillard’s own metaphors – a map of the real which is so detailed that it replaces the real and becomes the truth itself. It is a gigantic simulacrum that has provided hyperreal alternatives to almost any possible real-life process, from buying commodities to engaging in social interaction, and the designation “virtual world” serves only to underline its completely simulated nature. My analysis will focus on one particular area of this virtuality, namely that of social interaction or, rather, the changing nature of social interaction as a result of the increasing usage of social networking websites (in this case Facebook.com).
3.1 Facebook.com and hyperreality
This section will investigate Facebook.com and social interaction within a hyperreal framework (as outlined in section 2.1). It is divided into two sections: the first presents specific examples of simulations on Facebook.com, while the second works on a more abstract level and aims to hypothesize the implications of Facebook.com on social interaction.
3.1.1 Hyperreal symptoms
The first page that appears when one logs in to Facebook is the so-called “Home” page. An animation of a house is visible in the upper left corner, next to the Facebook logo.
Figure 1: screenshot from “Home” page
At this point we might already experience the first symptom of simulation on Facebook, since the animation of the house “replaces” reality and abolishes traditional referential relationships. The model of the house (the animation) is the simulacrum; it is not merely a representation of a real equivalent because the real never existed. In other words, the home is replaced by the home page, but it is not just replaced, because the home was never real. The animation of the house is the real while the house itself never existed. The animation - the simulacrum - precedes the real and thus becomes the truth itself. This might be the first sign of a hyperreal environment where the “Home” is located as the base of interaction, as the starting point where one is positioned when logging in. To push the limits of this theory, we might equate the process of logging in to that of actually waking up in the morning in your home. This merely underlines the notion of the internet as a “virtual world”, or a hyperreal world. In both the real and the virtual world (or on Facebook, at least), the home is the “base” from where one is able to perform a range of actions.
To inspect further the virtual and simulated nature of Facebook, I will investigate a function called the “Gift Shop” which is also part of the “Home” page (located in the far right column). This function allows users to send “gifts” to each other online.
Figure 2: screenshot of “Gift Shop”
The Gift Shop underlines Baudrillard’s notion that the equivalence of the sign and of the real has become utopian, and that representation has been replaced by simulation. It is an excellent example of the hyperreal nature of Facebook and how real social processes, for example that of giving a gift to another person, are devoured by simulations. Not only is the actual process of giving the gift to another person simulated, but also the actual purchase of the gift in the Gift Shop. Buying and giving is simulated. Gifts on Facebook are simulacra because they are not copies of an actual truth. Their real equivalent does not exist – they are utopian. The actual commodities do not exist; the animations become the real because they precede the real gifts. Taken to the extreme, we might argue that this is a modern variation of Baudrillard’s metaphor of the map that replaced the actual territory (cf. section 2.1). In the Gift Shop, animations are commodified so that they become the real and the truth. They are hyperreal commodities that replace real gifts, while the Gift Shop is the hyperreal – the “map” – of an actual shop and what people actually believe in. In this hyperreal environment we might argue that Baudrillard’s theory concerning the crumbling of the real as a result of disuse is prevailing, since the “map” has become the actual reality.
Since Facebook is a social networking community, I find it important also to analyze the actual process of communication and networking on the site. The central idea of Facebook is that each member creates a profile page from where he or she can list a number of personal information (religious views, political views, personal interest etc.), as well as communicate with other members via so-called “Wall posts” where users can write text messages to each other. These user profiles provide yet another perspective on the hyperreal nature of Facebook. A user profile can contain a vast amount of personal data that describe the user on several levels. In other words, the profiles serve to textualize people. Personal profiles become the simulacra of real people since individuals and their beliefs and behaviours are “mapped” in their profiles. Similarly, various pictures may be uploaded as well, which help to construct the personal map - the simulation - of the real individual. In a Baudrillardian perspective this proves that the real world and even humans, in this case, are crumbling away at the expense of the simulacrum; i.e. the online profile and textualized nature of the human being. Communication on Facebook is of course also completely textualized as it is transmitted through inter-user text messages. Again, this is a simulation of actual social interaction (verbal discourses), but it is nothing new in the world of online communication where verbal communication has already been replaced by simulacra such as e-mail and chat. As my analysis has demonstrated so far, Facebook adds new dimensions to the internet as a simulacrum, namely the simulation of actual commodities (gifts) and, more significantly, the simulation of human beings and identities. Essentially, when scrutinizing Facebook from a Baudrillardian point of view, the personal profile is not a representation of its real equivalent (the actual human being) but rather a simulation; the truth that people believe in. This notion of “hyperreal humans” might indeed seem incomprehensible, and I initially found it difficult to adjust to the thought, but then decided to conduct a small-scale experiment on Facebook to learn if Baudrillard’s theory was actually plausible in this context as well. What I did was simply to change my date of birth from August 8th to June 3rd. Facebook features an integrated function that notifies the user when one of his or her friends has a birthday, which meant that all my Facebook friends were made aware of my “new” birthday on June 3rd. Subsequently, I received quite a number of birthday greetings on the "Wall" of my profile. This very minimalist survey of the consequences of providing “false” information to other users proves that people believe in the textualized “me”; the simulacrum of me. They believe in the map of my personal information (including my simulated date of birth) and thereby in my hyperreal identity. Of course, this hypothesis would need to be elaborated with much more empirical data in order to be valid, but I understand now how it is indeed possible for the hyperreal "me" to become the truth and replace the original me.
3.1.2 Effects on social interaction
This subsection will consider how the processes of social interaction are affected by Facebook. As noted in the previous section, inter-user communication is textualized and becomes a simulation of actual social interaction, while other social processes (for example giving gifts to other users) have become hyperreal as well. So there seems to be quite a number of symbols on Facebook that replace their real equivalents. In the light of this, one might hypothesize that Facebook prompts social interaction to become hyperreal since people simply believe in the simulacra of individuals; the hyperreal humans. Hence, the hyperreal individual becomes the event and all related social interaction with the particular individual can then only exist within the hyperreal framework, i.e. via the tools of interaction on Facebook. It is the complete simulation of social interaction and of the social itself. Ultimately, Facebook can be perceived as a hyperreal community or even a hyperreal world, due to the fact that users can join various networks and groups depending on their interests and geographical locations. I might, for example, join the network of my current University and that of my home country. This means that hyperreal identities can join hyperreal institutions and countries, and that Facebook basically provides the foundations for a hyperreal world. In a Baudrillardian sense, we might perceive this as a staging of communication and consequently as a devouring of the social; a gigantic process of simulation (cf. section 2.1). Facebook provides “phantom content” that serve to stage the desire of the audience to engage in social interactions. We might then argue that social interaction on Facebook aids this process of devouring of the social, and of the real itself. This corresponds well with the remark that initially sparked this study, namely that “Facebook allows me to be social without really being social” (cf. section 1). This statement becomes the epitome of Facebook’s effect if we consider it in relation to Baudrillard’s notions. On Facebook, hyperreal sociality has replaced real sociality and devoured the actual social interaction amongst individuals.
The intention of my analysis above was deliberately to investigate Facebook purely on the terms of Baudrillard’s theory of the hyperreal, and not question any of his notions along the way. However, I deem it necessary to put into question and critically consider my findings in order to assess the applicability of Baudrillard’s theory when analyzing a social networking site such as Facebook. For example, one might argue that the real is not “crumbling away as a result of disuse” because of online networking. Instead, online communities can be acknowledged as communicative tools for real-life peers, and as common social ground from where real-life appointments can be made. The “Event” application on Facebook provides an example of a “link” between the two realities of the hyperreal and the real. With this particular application it is possible for users to invite other users to actual events, for example parties, public political speeches, demonstrations etc. The textualization of the event initially makes it hyperreal, and the hyperreal identities (Facebook users) still remain hyperreal when they decide to click the “accept” button and plan to attend the event. However, once the event actually takes place in reality we might argue that the hyperreal and the real merge and essentially serve to question Baudrillard’s idea of the failure of the real to “survive” the simulation. The textualized and hyperreal identities of Facebook users then prove to have real, human equivalents, and they can then no longer be considered as pure simulacra. So in this case users may not be so invested in the simulation of the event (the actual text on Facebook describing the event) that it itself becomes the truth, but instead attend the actual event and “bridge the gap” between the hyperreal and the real.
On the basis of my analysis, I feel it would be misleading to define Facebook as the ultimate catalyst for the simulation of social and cultural events. The hyperreality of Facebook does not serve to completely detach individuals from reality, since there are links between the hyperreal and the real (as noted above). However, I do believe that Facebook, as well as other similar social networking sites, has affected modern culture in terms of which social events are being simulated. While chat and e-mail has already led to the simulation of communication, Facebook has introduced the simulation of commodities as well as personal identities - to some extend at least. In other words, it has turned several processes of social interaction into hyperreality.
3.2 Facebook and panopticism
Similar to the structure in section 3.1, this section works on a detailed as well as an abstract level: first, I wish to present specific examples of panoptic trends on Facebook and, secondly, I consider the effects of panopticism on social interaction on the website.
3.2.1 Panoptic symptoms
In terms of surveillance, the internet provides substantial visibility. Tools such as cookies and search engines enable commercial businesses as well as private individuals to monitor people’s online behavior. Facebook can equally be considered a sphere of surveillance since it is possible to monitor a user’s behavior through the so-called “Mini-Feed”, which is a part of the user profile page.
Figure 3: screenshot of “Mini-Feed”
It enables the surveillance and tracking of user behavior on a detailed level, and the observer will be able to learn the exact actions and interests of the user (political and cultural interests can be scrutinized by recording which online groups the user joins). Complementary to the “Mini-Feed” is the “News Feed” on the “Home” page of Facebook. It basically gathers information from all the "Mini-Feeds" of one’s online friends and organizes them on one long list. If we bear in mind the structure of the Panopticon facility, the “Home” page functions as the guard tower from where one is able to surveil the “prisoners” – i.e. the other users – since all information is transmitted to one central location. The user profiles represent prisoner cells that can all be observed from the guard tower. In a Foucauldian sense, Facebook might then resemble the structure of the Panopticon where users are the objects of information (cf. section 2.2). However, this view must be contested by the following notions: firstly, the hierarchical structure on Facebook does not resemble that outlined by Foucault when he described the Panopticon. The unequal gaze and the one-way surveillance noted by Foucault, as well as the asymmetrical nature of the Panopticon, do not exist on Facebook as such. Even though surveillance and monitoring are possible (as noted above), it is not unequal or asymmetrical because all users are basically on the same hierarchical level; they all have access to the same functions and share the same amount of visibility. Surveillance is still “invisible” since it cannot be tracked by other users, but the inter-user relations are essentially symmetrical: users are both prisoners and inspectors at the same time. Secondly, a major difference between Foucault's original idea and its applicability on Facebook is the concept of permanent visibility. While prisoners in the Panopticon were constantly exposed to the "eye" of the inspector, users on Facebook can conduct a sort of self-censorship since they are able to restrict exactly what information they wish to share and render visible for other users. Ultimately, a user might also decide to “opt out” and simply delete his or her user account on Facebook, thereby abolishing the permanent visibility. The possibility for individuals to opt out of the panoptic society was never addressed by Foucault, but it would at least be impossible in a penitentiary environment.
However, while Facebook seems to enable inter-user surveillance on a symmetrical level, there might be other perspectives on the panoptic nature of Facebook. For example, Facebook has been criticized for violating the privacy of users by handing over confident information to commercial businesses . These businesses would then be able to tailor their advertising strategy to fit the demographic profile of each user. This controlled and goal-oriented type of surveillance corresponds better with the Foucauldian idea of Panopticism: it is designed to monitor and record the behaviors of users. The users become objects of information but never subjects in communication since they are not aware of who exactly is watching them and when they are being watched (cf. section 2.2). So while inter-user gazes seem to be equal, the commercial dimension of Facebook provides the possibility of an unequal gaze.
3.2.2 Effects on social interaction
On the basis of my findings in the previous subsection, we might argue that social interaction is affected in the sense that the amount of accessible information could serve to pacify users in their efforts to engage in social bonding. The “Feeds” on Facebook supply the user with a complete overview of all online behavior performed by his or her friends, which might eventually saturate one’s need for information. Hence, the user needs only to remain in the role of a “watchtower guard” and surveil other users to obtain a satisfactory amount of information, and actual social interaction (communication) might then be redundant. From a panoptic point of view, Facebook might render individuals the objects of information and not the subjects in communication, which eventually positions it as a tool for surveillance rather than social networking. Social interaction is simply unnecessary when one is able to obtain the desired information simply by monitoring the respective user profiles. Interpersonal communication becomes dispensable. However, this perspective completely ignores the fact that inter-user communication does take place on Facebook. So what is actually interesting to investigate is how social interaction is affected in an environment of complete visibility. As noted earlier, inter-user communication on Facebook is often conducted via the “Wall” on each profile, where the text messages are visible for all visiting users (it should however be noted that it is also possible for users to send private messages and thereby avoid public exposure). The concept of Wall-to-Wall communication has also served to make social interaction a public event. Two-way communication is not only reserved and accessible for the two participating interlocutors but for the whole online community. Inter-user interactions can be monitored by all. In this sense, we might consider Facebook a sort of reality TV where people are the event. As noted in section 2.2, Baudrillard argued that the unequal gaze has been abolished by the positioning of people as the source of information. People are the objects of the gaze. People are gazing at people. However, in order to fully grasp the significance of monitored social interaction and the effects of Wall-to-Wall communication, we would need to consider discursive, sociological, and psychological aspects of inter-user communication, which would exceed the framework and capacity of this study.
To sum up, I believe that Facebook can indeed function as a tool for inter-user surveillance and monitoring, but it does not resemble the traditional structure of the Panopticon as outlined by Foucault since it is based on symmetrical user hierarchies. Social interaction could be affected in the sense that the amount of transparency and visible information might undermine the need for users to communicate with each other, but rather utilize Facebook as a tool for passive looking and observation.
4. Discussion
My analysis of the implications of hyperreality and panopticism on social interaction on Facebook illustrated the following: firstly, I argued that several processes of social interaction were being simulated on Facebook, including interpersonal communication, exchange of commodities, and the formation of personal identities as well. However, my analysis indicated that Facebook also bridges the simulations of social interaction with the “real” social, for example through invitations to parties and other social events. Secondly, my analysis proved that while Facebook might be perceived as a virtual model of the Panopticon that offers substantial visibility and transparency, the symmetrical nature of inter-user gazes deviated from the original hierarchical structure of the panoptic setup. However, I also argued that the substantial possibilities for surveillance might prompt users to become less active in the interpersonal communication and merely reduce their activities to “looking” at other users.
On the basis of my analysis, I believe Facebook has had a significant influence on interpersonal social interaction. I perceive it somewhat as a virtual attempt to textualize the “real world” and all inherent social processes. It is the hyperreal community (but not the only one since online role-playing games, e.g. Second Life, seek to establish a virtual world as well). At the same time, the textualizations of every single piece of discourse and information, and the online community’s access to all of these “texts”, serve to position Facebook as a platform of complete visibility. Hence, the hyperreal, online society must be considered an extensive modern embodiment of Foucault’s exposition of the panoptic society, where individuals can be monitored in great detail. However, we must remember that Foucault’s theory was originally concerned with power relations between the “prisoner” and the “guard”, and I do not think Facebook involves any obvious power hierarchies between users.
In terms of the effects on social interaction, I believe the individual user is able to partially determine to what extend social behaviors and the exchange of information should be affected by Facebook and the hyperreal platform. As noted in my analysis, Facebook enables the user to engage it what we might term “passive sociality”, where he or she merely monitors user profiles and retrieves information, while avoiding communication. In other words, it is possible to be “social without really being social”. On the other hand, a user might also utilize Facebook as a tool of interaction and communication; as a hyperreal platform from where “real” social appointments with “real” peers can be made. Facebook has not forced social interaction to become hyperreal, but instead enabled the individual user to decide what social processes he or she wants to simulate. In relation to contemporary culture, I believe Facebook adds a new dimension to the so-called “Big Brother” society, where surveillance of individuals is the central notion. We might hypothesize that Facebook legitimizes surveillance in the sense that everybody can now sit in the “guard tower” and watch other individuals. Surveillance has become accessible to the public. Facebook offers surveillance as part of the social experience. The Focauldian idea of the unequal gaze of surveillance is abolished by the distribution of surveillance to the public; the option for everyone to observe. This might indicate that surveillance has become an integrated part of contemporary culture, and that it is no longer reserved solely for societal institutions such as schools, workplaces or prisons, but for the individual citizen as well.
5. Conclusion
This paper sat out to investigate social interaction on the American-based web community Facebook.com in relation to Baudrillard’s hyperreality theory and Foucault’s theory of panopticism. My analysis revealed several symptoms of hyperreal sociality and simulations of social interaction, as well as panoptic trends and the possibility of inter-user surveillance, which could eventually serve as a substitute for actual interpersonal communication and social bonding. However, my analysis also indicated that Facebook users posses the means to censor the amount of information they wish to render visible, as well as the option of deleting their own account, thereby avoiding the complete visibility and transparency on Facebook. Additionally, I proved that the hyperreal environment of Facebook in some instances overlapped into the sphere of the “real” world, and that users are able to decide themselves how they wish to utilize Facebook as a social tool.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~
All questions welcome, and if you'd like to get in touch with Rune personally send me a private message.
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical framework
2.1 Baudrillard and the hyperreal
2.2 Foucault and the panoptic society
3. Analysis
3.1 Facebook.com and hyperreality
3.1.1 Hyperreal symptoms
3.1.2 Effects on social interaction
3.2 Facebook.com and panopticism
3.2.1 Panoptic symptoms
3.2.2 Effects on social interaction
5. Conclusion
1. Introduction
If you ask almost any individual in the Western world about what exactly constitutes human sociality, most people would probably include some aspect of online interaction in their definition; for example chat, e-mail, or interactions through online communities. Facebook.com can be considered part of the latter category; the web community – a social networking site – where users can design a personal profile and make it accessible for their online friends. The American-based website has only existed since 2004 but already managed to attract over 40 million users worldwide, and has become the world’s leading online networking community.
I decided to render Facbook.com my object of analysis in this paper as a result of both personal and scientific curiosity. My personal interest originates from my own use of the website and from the fact that most of my peers use it as well – many of them even on a daily basis. My scientific interest derives from a TV debate show on Danish television about contemporary cultural phenomena, where Facebook.com was the subject of discussion (“Smagsdommerne”, DR2, February 2008). Even though the participating debaters restricted themselves to merely present their own experiences with the website, and failed to consider its impact on cultural and social behaviour on a general plane, one participant produced an interesting comment: "Facebook allows me to be social without really being social. I can maintain contact with my peers but don’t need to interact with them in the real world" (my own translation). This sparked my interest in investigating the actual implications of Facebook on social interaction, and the nature of Facebook as a communicative tool. Hence, in this study I intend to study the contemporary sociocultural phenomenon Facebook.com, by subjecting it to cultural theories of hyperreality and panopticism. My aim is to be able to understand the nature of social interaction on Facebook in relation to “postmodern” cultural theories that identify simulation and surveillance as predominant concepts in contemporary society.
For the purpose of this study I have decided to limit my theoretical framework to include Jean Baudrillard’s conceptualization of the hyperreal as well as Michel Foucault’s theory of the panoptic society. Baudrillard’s theory will be applied on Facebook in order to assess to what extend, if any, his claim that modern society has replaced all reality and meaning with symbols and signs is also valid in relation to the process of social interaction. Has social interaction become hyperreal? I have included Foucault’s theory to better grasp the exact nature of Facebook as a social and cultural tool and to investigate the effects of surveillance and visibility on social interaction. To sum up, this study contains concise expositions of the theories by Baudrillard and Foucault (section 2), an analysis of Facebook.com based on the theoretical framework (section 3), and a brief discussion of my results (section 4).
2. Theoretical framework
Below I will investigate the hyperreality theory by Baudrillard (based on the English translation of his work Simulacra and Simulation) as well as the theory of the panoptic society by Foucault (in the English translation of Discipline and Punish). I intend to primarily expose the fundamental ideas of the two authors and not provide comprehensive summaries of their respective works as such, but rather single out the aspects of their theories that I find relevant for the purpose of my study of sociality and social interaction.
2.1 Baudrillard and the hyperreal
In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard argues that the referential relationship between the real and the copy has changed insofar as the copy is no longer a “faithful” representation of its real equivalent. He believes that the principle of equivalence of the sign and of the real has become utopian and hence that representation has been replaced by the process of simulation (Baudrillard, 1994: 6). Simulation abolishes the stable referential relationship between the real and the copy and places, instead, the copy – the simulacrum – as the actual truth; because it precedes the real and the real cannot “survive” it. However, since the simulacrum precedes the real it cannot be an actual copy and it becomes instead the real itself, i.e. the hyperreal (ibid: 1). Baudrillard identifies the hyperreal as “[…] the generation by models of a real without origin or reality […]” (ibid: 1), which he exemplifies by arguing that maps have preceded the territories that they illustrate. He cites an ancient fable where the Empire once created a map that was as large and detailed as the Empire itself. But as the Empire crumbled away, only the map – the simulation of the real – remained. Today, Baudrillard argues, maps are the actual reality; the truth that people believe in. They believe in the hyperreal, the map, while the original real, the actual territory, is crumbling away as a result of disuse. Baudrillard terms this the desert of the real.
The notion that modern society replaces reality and traditional referential relationships with a model of simulation, in which the simulacra creates a perceived reality, is basically the general premise of Baudrillard’s work. Throughout Simulacra and Simulation he provides examples of how this process of simulation functions in religion, science, and fiction, as well as in several other fields and environments. For the purpose of this study I will investigate Baudrillard’s evaluation of the simulated nature of media and communication, and the resulting effects on sociality. He argues that mediated information “[…] devours its own content. It devours communication and the social” (ibid: 80). This occurs for two reasons: firstly, rather than creating communication and meaning, it exhausts itself in the process of staging communication and meaning. In other words, mediated communication is a gigantic process of simulation invaded by “phantom content” such as nondirective interviews and listener/viewer participation, which ultimately serve to stage the desire of the audience and functions as a big simulacrum with the purpose of hiding the “obvious” reality. Hence, the hyperreal of mediated communication and meaning becomes more real than reality and that is how the real is abolished at the expense of the hyperreal (ibid: 81). Secondly, Baudrillard argues that this mise-en-scène of communication, the mass media and information pursues “[…] irresistible destructuration of the social” (ibid: 81). He claims that the dissolving of information leads to a dissolving of the social into a sort of nebulous state, and hence that the media does not produce socialization but rather the exact opposite, namely an implosion of sociality in the masses. In other words, Baudrillard’s general hypothesis regarding the significance and impact of media and information on communication seems to be that information neutralizes, or even destructs, meaning and signification. Essentially, this perspective on the role of the media contradicts the common held opinion that whoever is “[…] underexposed to the media is desocialized or virtually asocial”. (ibid: 80).
2.2 Foucault and the panoptic society
Under the headline panopticism, Foucault theorizes how modern society has become increasingly focused on surveillance and discipline, and how individuals are constantly visible even though they have simultaneously become more individualized. In Discipline and Punish, he constructs his theories on the basis of the philosopher Jeremy Bentham’s model of a penitentiary facility – the Panopticon – in which a tower with windows on all sides is placed in the middle of the construction, and provides complete visibility to a circular formation of cell blocks surrounding the tower. Each cell holds one prisoner. Every cell is illuminated and can be observed from the central guard tower, while the prisoners cannot see the guard in the tower nor communicate with fellow inmates. Hence, the prisoner "[…] is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication" (Foucault, 1977: 200). Accordingly, this “invisible“ nature of surveillance, and the isolation of prisoners, functions as a guarantee for sustaining order since prisoners are unable to plot or fight against each other. Foucault then expands this theory to be applicable on several levels in society and not merely as an architectural structure of a prison. He argues, for example, that the collective effect in schools has been replaced by separation of students which eliminates copying, noise chatter and waste of time. And the separation of workers abolishes theft, coalition and slow work. Hence, the main effect of the Panopticon, namely “[…] to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power” (ibid: 201), works in several societal institutions as well. According to Foucault, a panoptic setup secures constant efficiency and order because the “prisoner” can never be sure whether or not he is being observed by the "guard". In other words, this unequal gaze between prisoner and guard makes the former less likely to break rules since the risk of being observed exists permanently (ibid: 202).
But not only does the Panopticon enable the observer to surveil the prisoner, it also enables him to compare and draw up differences among medical patients, schoolchildren, workers or any other groups of people, and thereby to assess various characters and their attitudes. This adds a more functional perspective to the panoptic theory and enables the observer (for example an employer or a school teacher) to measure and calculate the efforts of each individual, and compare them to those of other isolated individuals. All movements, even the slightest ones, can be observed and all events are recorded (ibid: 197). To sum up the above notions, I understand the general idea of Foucault's exposition of the Panopticon to be that most hierarchical structures in society, for example hospitals, workplaces and schools have developed to resemble the structure of the Panopticon. Foucault perceives that modern societies have adopted this “light” way of disciplining people as a means to observe and normalize the respective institutions in a pervasive manner.
In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard also discusses the theory of the Panopticon, in particular in relation to the increasing importance of the media in modern society. He argues that reality TV (for example Big Brother and other similar shows that seek to portray the "real" life of a group of people) signifies a “[…] switch from the panoptic mechanism of surveillance […] to a system of deterrence, in which the distinction between the passive and the active is abolished […]” (Baudrillard, 1994: 29). In other words, he argues that panopticism has come to an end as a result of dissolving hierarchies. There is no longer an unequal gaze that indicates divisions of power or submission, because people are now looking at people - or rather, people are looking at themselves; people are the event. They are the source of information. According to Baudrillard, the media "mutates" the real into the hyperreal and can thereby no longer be considered the source of an absolute gaze (ibid: 29).
3. Analysis
This section is dedicated to the analysis of social interaction on Facebook.com in the light of the theories by Baudrillard and Foucault presented in the previous section. Before progressing to the actual analysis, I wish to briefly address the applicability of the theories on my object of analysis. While Baudrillard’s theory seems to be applicable in most cultural contexts (In Simulacra and Simulation, Baudrillard himself puts everything from media and religion to science fiction into the hyperreal framework), Foucault’s theory specifically concerns itself with divisions of power in society and may initially be more complex to accommodate to the study of social interaction on the internet. However, I still believe that Foucault’s notions of hierarchical structures, surveillance and gazes will be beneficial for my analysis of sociality on Facebook.com since they enable me to study the implications of visibility and transparency on social interaction.
Furthermore, it should also be noted that neither Baudrillard nor Foucault addressed worldwide networking and internet in specific in their writings. However, I believe that the internet serves somewhat as a perfect paradigm both for the Foucauldian ideas of surveillance and visibility and, especially, as an example of a hyperreal environment in a Baudrillardian perspective. I perceive the internet as the ultimate hyperreal, or – to use one of Baudrillard’s own metaphors – a map of the real which is so detailed that it replaces the real and becomes the truth itself. It is a gigantic simulacrum that has provided hyperreal alternatives to almost any possible real-life process, from buying commodities to engaging in social interaction, and the designation “virtual world” serves only to underline its completely simulated nature. My analysis will focus on one particular area of this virtuality, namely that of social interaction or, rather, the changing nature of social interaction as a result of the increasing usage of social networking websites (in this case Facebook.com).
3.1 Facebook.com and hyperreality
This section will investigate Facebook.com and social interaction within a hyperreal framework (as outlined in section 2.1). It is divided into two sections: the first presents specific examples of simulations on Facebook.com, while the second works on a more abstract level and aims to hypothesize the implications of Facebook.com on social interaction.
3.1.1 Hyperreal symptoms
The first page that appears when one logs in to Facebook is the so-called “Home” page. An animation of a house is visible in the upper left corner, next to the Facebook logo.
Figure 1: screenshot from “Home” page
At this point we might already experience the first symptom of simulation on Facebook, since the animation of the house “replaces” reality and abolishes traditional referential relationships. The model of the house (the animation) is the simulacrum; it is not merely a representation of a real equivalent because the real never existed. In other words, the home is replaced by the home page, but it is not just replaced, because the home was never real. The animation of the house is the real while the house itself never existed. The animation - the simulacrum - precedes the real and thus becomes the truth itself. This might be the first sign of a hyperreal environment where the “Home” is located as the base of interaction, as the starting point where one is positioned when logging in. To push the limits of this theory, we might equate the process of logging in to that of actually waking up in the morning in your home. This merely underlines the notion of the internet as a “virtual world”, or a hyperreal world. In both the real and the virtual world (or on Facebook, at least), the home is the “base” from where one is able to perform a range of actions.
To inspect further the virtual and simulated nature of Facebook, I will investigate a function called the “Gift Shop” which is also part of the “Home” page (located in the far right column). This function allows users to send “gifts” to each other online.
Figure 2: screenshot of “Gift Shop”
The Gift Shop underlines Baudrillard’s notion that the equivalence of the sign and of the real has become utopian, and that representation has been replaced by simulation. It is an excellent example of the hyperreal nature of Facebook and how real social processes, for example that of giving a gift to another person, are devoured by simulations. Not only is the actual process of giving the gift to another person simulated, but also the actual purchase of the gift in the Gift Shop. Buying and giving is simulated. Gifts on Facebook are simulacra because they are not copies of an actual truth. Their real equivalent does not exist – they are utopian. The actual commodities do not exist; the animations become the real because they precede the real gifts. Taken to the extreme, we might argue that this is a modern variation of Baudrillard’s metaphor of the map that replaced the actual territory (cf. section 2.1). In the Gift Shop, animations are commodified so that they become the real and the truth. They are hyperreal commodities that replace real gifts, while the Gift Shop is the hyperreal – the “map” – of an actual shop and what people actually believe in. In this hyperreal environment we might argue that Baudrillard’s theory concerning the crumbling of the real as a result of disuse is prevailing, since the “map” has become the actual reality.
Since Facebook is a social networking community, I find it important also to analyze the actual process of communication and networking on the site. The central idea of Facebook is that each member creates a profile page from where he or she can list a number of personal information (religious views, political views, personal interest etc.), as well as communicate with other members via so-called “Wall posts” where users can write text messages to each other. These user profiles provide yet another perspective on the hyperreal nature of Facebook. A user profile can contain a vast amount of personal data that describe the user on several levels. In other words, the profiles serve to textualize people. Personal profiles become the simulacra of real people since individuals and their beliefs and behaviours are “mapped” in their profiles. Similarly, various pictures may be uploaded as well, which help to construct the personal map - the simulation - of the real individual. In a Baudrillardian perspective this proves that the real world and even humans, in this case, are crumbling away at the expense of the simulacrum; i.e. the online profile and textualized nature of the human being. Communication on Facebook is of course also completely textualized as it is transmitted through inter-user text messages. Again, this is a simulation of actual social interaction (verbal discourses), but it is nothing new in the world of online communication where verbal communication has already been replaced by simulacra such as e-mail and chat. As my analysis has demonstrated so far, Facebook adds new dimensions to the internet as a simulacrum, namely the simulation of actual commodities (gifts) and, more significantly, the simulation of human beings and identities. Essentially, when scrutinizing Facebook from a Baudrillardian point of view, the personal profile is not a representation of its real equivalent (the actual human being) but rather a simulation; the truth that people believe in. This notion of “hyperreal humans” might indeed seem incomprehensible, and I initially found it difficult to adjust to the thought, but then decided to conduct a small-scale experiment on Facebook to learn if Baudrillard’s theory was actually plausible in this context as well. What I did was simply to change my date of birth from August 8th to June 3rd. Facebook features an integrated function that notifies the user when one of his or her friends has a birthday, which meant that all my Facebook friends were made aware of my “new” birthday on June 3rd. Subsequently, I received quite a number of birthday greetings on the "Wall" of my profile. This very minimalist survey of the consequences of providing “false” information to other users proves that people believe in the textualized “me”; the simulacrum of me. They believe in the map of my personal information (including my simulated date of birth) and thereby in my hyperreal identity. Of course, this hypothesis would need to be elaborated with much more empirical data in order to be valid, but I understand now how it is indeed possible for the hyperreal "me" to become the truth and replace the original me.
3.1.2 Effects on social interaction
This subsection will consider how the processes of social interaction are affected by Facebook. As noted in the previous section, inter-user communication is textualized and becomes a simulation of actual social interaction, while other social processes (for example giving gifts to other users) have become hyperreal as well. So there seems to be quite a number of symbols on Facebook that replace their real equivalents. In the light of this, one might hypothesize that Facebook prompts social interaction to become hyperreal since people simply believe in the simulacra of individuals; the hyperreal humans. Hence, the hyperreal individual becomes the event and all related social interaction with the particular individual can then only exist within the hyperreal framework, i.e. via the tools of interaction on Facebook. It is the complete simulation of social interaction and of the social itself. Ultimately, Facebook can be perceived as a hyperreal community or even a hyperreal world, due to the fact that users can join various networks and groups depending on their interests and geographical locations. I might, for example, join the network of my current University and that of my home country. This means that hyperreal identities can join hyperreal institutions and countries, and that Facebook basically provides the foundations for a hyperreal world. In a Baudrillardian sense, we might perceive this as a staging of communication and consequently as a devouring of the social; a gigantic process of simulation (cf. section 2.1). Facebook provides “phantom content” that serve to stage the desire of the audience to engage in social interactions. We might then argue that social interaction on Facebook aids this process of devouring of the social, and of the real itself. This corresponds well with the remark that initially sparked this study, namely that “Facebook allows me to be social without really being social” (cf. section 1). This statement becomes the epitome of Facebook’s effect if we consider it in relation to Baudrillard’s notions. On Facebook, hyperreal sociality has replaced real sociality and devoured the actual social interaction amongst individuals.
The intention of my analysis above was deliberately to investigate Facebook purely on the terms of Baudrillard’s theory of the hyperreal, and not question any of his notions along the way. However, I deem it necessary to put into question and critically consider my findings in order to assess the applicability of Baudrillard’s theory when analyzing a social networking site such as Facebook. For example, one might argue that the real is not “crumbling away as a result of disuse” because of online networking. Instead, online communities can be acknowledged as communicative tools for real-life peers, and as common social ground from where real-life appointments can be made. The “Event” application on Facebook provides an example of a “link” between the two realities of the hyperreal and the real. With this particular application it is possible for users to invite other users to actual events, for example parties, public political speeches, demonstrations etc. The textualization of the event initially makes it hyperreal, and the hyperreal identities (Facebook users) still remain hyperreal when they decide to click the “accept” button and plan to attend the event. However, once the event actually takes place in reality we might argue that the hyperreal and the real merge and essentially serve to question Baudrillard’s idea of the failure of the real to “survive” the simulation. The textualized and hyperreal identities of Facebook users then prove to have real, human equivalents, and they can then no longer be considered as pure simulacra. So in this case users may not be so invested in the simulation of the event (the actual text on Facebook describing the event) that it itself becomes the truth, but instead attend the actual event and “bridge the gap” between the hyperreal and the real.
On the basis of my analysis, I feel it would be misleading to define Facebook as the ultimate catalyst for the simulation of social and cultural events. The hyperreality of Facebook does not serve to completely detach individuals from reality, since there are links between the hyperreal and the real (as noted above). However, I do believe that Facebook, as well as other similar social networking sites, has affected modern culture in terms of which social events are being simulated. While chat and e-mail has already led to the simulation of communication, Facebook has introduced the simulation of commodities as well as personal identities - to some extend at least. In other words, it has turned several processes of social interaction into hyperreality.
3.2 Facebook and panopticism
Similar to the structure in section 3.1, this section works on a detailed as well as an abstract level: first, I wish to present specific examples of panoptic trends on Facebook and, secondly, I consider the effects of panopticism on social interaction on the website.
3.2.1 Panoptic symptoms
In terms of surveillance, the internet provides substantial visibility. Tools such as cookies and search engines enable commercial businesses as well as private individuals to monitor people’s online behavior. Facebook can equally be considered a sphere of surveillance since it is possible to monitor a user’s behavior through the so-called “Mini-Feed”, which is a part of the user profile page.
Figure 3: screenshot of “Mini-Feed”
It enables the surveillance and tracking of user behavior on a detailed level, and the observer will be able to learn the exact actions and interests of the user (political and cultural interests can be scrutinized by recording which online groups the user joins). Complementary to the “Mini-Feed” is the “News Feed” on the “Home” page of Facebook. It basically gathers information from all the "Mini-Feeds" of one’s online friends and organizes them on one long list. If we bear in mind the structure of the Panopticon facility, the “Home” page functions as the guard tower from where one is able to surveil the “prisoners” – i.e. the other users – since all information is transmitted to one central location. The user profiles represent prisoner cells that can all be observed from the guard tower. In a Foucauldian sense, Facebook might then resemble the structure of the Panopticon where users are the objects of information (cf. section 2.2). However, this view must be contested by the following notions: firstly, the hierarchical structure on Facebook does not resemble that outlined by Foucault when he described the Panopticon. The unequal gaze and the one-way surveillance noted by Foucault, as well as the asymmetrical nature of the Panopticon, do not exist on Facebook as such. Even though surveillance and monitoring are possible (as noted above), it is not unequal or asymmetrical because all users are basically on the same hierarchical level; they all have access to the same functions and share the same amount of visibility. Surveillance is still “invisible” since it cannot be tracked by other users, but the inter-user relations are essentially symmetrical: users are both prisoners and inspectors at the same time. Secondly, a major difference between Foucault's original idea and its applicability on Facebook is the concept of permanent visibility. While prisoners in the Panopticon were constantly exposed to the "eye" of the inspector, users on Facebook can conduct a sort of self-censorship since they are able to restrict exactly what information they wish to share and render visible for other users. Ultimately, a user might also decide to “opt out” and simply delete his or her user account on Facebook, thereby abolishing the permanent visibility. The possibility for individuals to opt out of the panoptic society was never addressed by Foucault, but it would at least be impossible in a penitentiary environment.
However, while Facebook seems to enable inter-user surveillance on a symmetrical level, there might be other perspectives on the panoptic nature of Facebook. For example, Facebook has been criticized for violating the privacy of users by handing over confident information to commercial businesses . These businesses would then be able to tailor their advertising strategy to fit the demographic profile of each user. This controlled and goal-oriented type of surveillance corresponds better with the Foucauldian idea of Panopticism: it is designed to monitor and record the behaviors of users. The users become objects of information but never subjects in communication since they are not aware of who exactly is watching them and when they are being watched (cf. section 2.2). So while inter-user gazes seem to be equal, the commercial dimension of Facebook provides the possibility of an unequal gaze.
3.2.2 Effects on social interaction
On the basis of my findings in the previous subsection, we might argue that social interaction is affected in the sense that the amount of accessible information could serve to pacify users in their efforts to engage in social bonding. The “Feeds” on Facebook supply the user with a complete overview of all online behavior performed by his or her friends, which might eventually saturate one’s need for information. Hence, the user needs only to remain in the role of a “watchtower guard” and surveil other users to obtain a satisfactory amount of information, and actual social interaction (communication) might then be redundant. From a panoptic point of view, Facebook might render individuals the objects of information and not the subjects in communication, which eventually positions it as a tool for surveillance rather than social networking. Social interaction is simply unnecessary when one is able to obtain the desired information simply by monitoring the respective user profiles. Interpersonal communication becomes dispensable. However, this perspective completely ignores the fact that inter-user communication does take place on Facebook. So what is actually interesting to investigate is how social interaction is affected in an environment of complete visibility. As noted earlier, inter-user communication on Facebook is often conducted via the “Wall” on each profile, where the text messages are visible for all visiting users (it should however be noted that it is also possible for users to send private messages and thereby avoid public exposure). The concept of Wall-to-Wall communication has also served to make social interaction a public event. Two-way communication is not only reserved and accessible for the two participating interlocutors but for the whole online community. Inter-user interactions can be monitored by all. In this sense, we might consider Facebook a sort of reality TV where people are the event. As noted in section 2.2, Baudrillard argued that the unequal gaze has been abolished by the positioning of people as the source of information. People are the objects of the gaze. People are gazing at people. However, in order to fully grasp the significance of monitored social interaction and the effects of Wall-to-Wall communication, we would need to consider discursive, sociological, and psychological aspects of inter-user communication, which would exceed the framework and capacity of this study.
To sum up, I believe that Facebook can indeed function as a tool for inter-user surveillance and monitoring, but it does not resemble the traditional structure of the Panopticon as outlined by Foucault since it is based on symmetrical user hierarchies. Social interaction could be affected in the sense that the amount of transparency and visible information might undermine the need for users to communicate with each other, but rather utilize Facebook as a tool for passive looking and observation.
4. Discussion
My analysis of the implications of hyperreality and panopticism on social interaction on Facebook illustrated the following: firstly, I argued that several processes of social interaction were being simulated on Facebook, including interpersonal communication, exchange of commodities, and the formation of personal identities as well. However, my analysis indicated that Facebook also bridges the simulations of social interaction with the “real” social, for example through invitations to parties and other social events. Secondly, my analysis proved that while Facebook might be perceived as a virtual model of the Panopticon that offers substantial visibility and transparency, the symmetrical nature of inter-user gazes deviated from the original hierarchical structure of the panoptic setup. However, I also argued that the substantial possibilities for surveillance might prompt users to become less active in the interpersonal communication and merely reduce their activities to “looking” at other users.
On the basis of my analysis, I believe Facebook has had a significant influence on interpersonal social interaction. I perceive it somewhat as a virtual attempt to textualize the “real world” and all inherent social processes. It is the hyperreal community (but not the only one since online role-playing games, e.g. Second Life, seek to establish a virtual world as well). At the same time, the textualizations of every single piece of discourse and information, and the online community’s access to all of these “texts”, serve to position Facebook as a platform of complete visibility. Hence, the hyperreal, online society must be considered an extensive modern embodiment of Foucault’s exposition of the panoptic society, where individuals can be monitored in great detail. However, we must remember that Foucault’s theory was originally concerned with power relations between the “prisoner” and the “guard”, and I do not think Facebook involves any obvious power hierarchies between users.
In terms of the effects on social interaction, I believe the individual user is able to partially determine to what extend social behaviors and the exchange of information should be affected by Facebook and the hyperreal platform. As noted in my analysis, Facebook enables the user to engage it what we might term “passive sociality”, where he or she merely monitors user profiles and retrieves information, while avoiding communication. In other words, it is possible to be “social without really being social”. On the other hand, a user might also utilize Facebook as a tool of interaction and communication; as a hyperreal platform from where “real” social appointments with “real” peers can be made. Facebook has not forced social interaction to become hyperreal, but instead enabled the individual user to decide what social processes he or she wants to simulate. In relation to contemporary culture, I believe Facebook adds a new dimension to the so-called “Big Brother” society, where surveillance of individuals is the central notion. We might hypothesize that Facebook legitimizes surveillance in the sense that everybody can now sit in the “guard tower” and watch other individuals. Surveillance has become accessible to the public. Facebook offers surveillance as part of the social experience. The Focauldian idea of the unequal gaze of surveillance is abolished by the distribution of surveillance to the public; the option for everyone to observe. This might indicate that surveillance has become an integrated part of contemporary culture, and that it is no longer reserved solely for societal institutions such as schools, workplaces or prisons, but for the individual citizen as well.
5. Conclusion
This paper sat out to investigate social interaction on the American-based web community Facebook.com in relation to Baudrillard’s hyperreality theory and Foucault’s theory of panopticism. My analysis revealed several symptoms of hyperreal sociality and simulations of social interaction, as well as panoptic trends and the possibility of inter-user surveillance, which could eventually serve as a substitute for actual interpersonal communication and social bonding. However, my analysis also indicated that Facebook users posses the means to censor the amount of information they wish to render visible, as well as the option of deleting their own account, thereby avoiding the complete visibility and transparency on Facebook. Additionally, I proved that the hyperreal environment of Facebook in some instances overlapped into the sphere of the “real” world, and that users are able to decide themselves how they wish to utilize Facebook as a social tool.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~
Rune is currently studying media and cultural studies at a university in one of Denmark's large cities, and is a brilliant composer and performer of classical music. You can find out more about him on his gorgeous-looking website, www.runevejby.dk
All questions welcome, and if you'd like to get in touch with Rune personally send me a private message.
| 43 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
