Theme 2

Electronically mediated relationships from Mary Dyck to twitter followers.

Today’s biggest socializing network sites are Twitter and Facebook. These two sites allow for individuals to keep in touch with those they have known throughout their lives and even those they’ve never met. In a roundabout way, they allow normal people to become stalkers without the hassle of leaving their house and physically stalking someone. Through these sites, we can see into other people’s lives and know where they are, what they’re doing, and what’s on their minds.

As Meyrowitz states, an audience tends to form parasocial relationships with those they are viewing. An example would be Oprah. Oprah is viewed by millions of people and the openness she displays on her show allows for her audience to feel a deep connection with the image she gives off. People begin talking about her as if they had personally sat down and had a cup of coffee with her. She is no longer Ms. Winfrey but rather Oprah and in some cases, O. They believe since she has empathy for her guests and talks about common problems, this makes her reach out to all her viewers as a real person they know. However, this is not the case. Oprah does not know her fans personal lives, nor do they know hers. Her audience places her on an unrealistic pedestal and perceives themselves to have a direct relationship with her. Such has been the case throughout history.

Mary Dyck, as we read about earlier in the semester, wrote in her diary about the soap operas she would listen to on her radio before things like Internet and television came around. Each day, Dyck would listen to her shows on the radio and record her favorite moments in her diary. What makes this story interesting is the fact that she recorded the events as if the characters were close personal friends. She wrote, “Well this was Harvey’s last chance, to take his sweet Precious Betty to dinner. He said its farewell Betty dear, bursting into tears, he said Congratulations to you and Bob and best wishes for your future happiness.” There is no introduction of what soap opera she’s talking about or even a recap over the story line. These lines are stated as if Betty and Bob lived next door.

The parasocial relationship that Dyck deals with is of the imaginary form. Dyck’s characters from her diary are those from a fictional soap opera. She’s creating relationships with people who do not really exist. This is the type of relationship that was formed in those days. There was no television to allow people to see whom they were idolizing. This parasocial relationship could be deemed dangerous because of its fanciful ideals. This kind of relationship calls for normal sane people to believe that the characters they hear of are real.

This differs greatly from the parasocial relationships we form today through use of Twitter and Facebook. Twitter for us today is a type of run on blog as Will Leitch discusses in his article “How Tweet it is.” Twitter allows for an individual to write down their thoughts and feelings at different moments in time without having to write a complete and expansive blog entry. Twitter works by creating a steady stream of “tweets” so a person can update where they are or what they’re doing as soon as it happens. It also allows for someone to “follow” others, including friends, celebrities, or random strangers living in the same area.

What could possibly be the appeal of a site like this? It’s a way to keep in touch, without actually having to be in touch with the person. You can look into other’s lives, know who they’re with, what they’re doing, where they are in the world without having to call them or search for such information. It’s presented to you in an organized and convenient way.

Facebook has a similar system to Twitter known as they Live News Feed. Facebookers update their status to let their friends know why they aren’t on facebook or what they’re doing at that point at time. Facebook also provides more personal information and things like writing on walls, common interest groups, fan pages, etc. Facebook suggests friends to you based on your interests, other people you’re friends with, and whatever networks you belong to. For example: I belong to the Long Island University network on my facebook page. Many of my friend suggestions are people who also attend LIU and have some of my friends in common with me. Generally, I do not flat out send a friend request but I do look into their pages and see if I may have known them from around campus. Being able to do this allows me to form my own parasocial relationship with the people I can search. The pages I scope out have no idea that I am learning about their lives and finding out the type of person they are.

This type of relationship is vastly different from the ones formed between Mary Dyck and her soap opera characters. This relationship is based on a real living person. I could easily walk through campus one day and see a person I had only looked up on the internet the night before and know things such as where they’re from, how many friends they have, what their Halloween costume was and their relationship status. This type of relationship is just as serious as Mary Dyck’s imaginary relationship. These relationships usually can lead to stalking and obsession from those who view into the lives of others. Celebrities have Twitters and facebooks to show their fans how “down to earth and real” they are. However, this can create major problems for them. Having their fans “know” them from what they read about them on the Internet can cause major issues. The Internet is not the way to get to know someone. Yes, you can read into someone’s life. You can see the superficial things about them, but does that mean we truly KNOW a person? Of course not.

In some people’s minds, knowing everything on someone’s Twitter and Facebook enables them to know the person as an individual. We start to talk about friends we haven’t seen in person in years as if they were over visiting just yesterday. We get emotionally attached to the people they are attached to and feel their pain or sorrow from their loss. We sympathize with them when we really have no justification behind it. We think that because we read their status updates everyday that we are a part of them. It’s dangerous and completely untrue.

We can clearly see the division between old media ways and current media. Relationships formed back then were between a viewer and a voice they heard through the radio ( Mary Dyck). They became attached to characters whose lives they followed everyday at a specific time. Relationships today are more directly based on real people (most commonly celebrities) and living individuals. We read about the lives of others and peek into their worlds causing us to believe we know the person they truly are. Both of these relationships are unhealthy but unavoidable with the access given to each person through the Internet and back then the radio. When nothing else is available to occupy our time, we turn to ways of entertainment such as radio and Internet. This boredom causes us to waste our time looking through other people’s lives. The methods of forming these relationships may have changed but the type of bond we form is still the same.