What is Real? (week 4)

While I found the Baym and Walter articles useful in picking apart the aspects of CMC and looking at how they combine with user expectations, intent and environmental conditions to produce different kinds of interpersonal results (and relating these scenarios to various communication and other theories), I found myself most intrigued by the concept of what is “real.” Whether talking about projected image, relationships or community, I began to feel that in many cases, the distinctions between "virtual" and "real" were pretty murky.

For example, as quoted in the Walther article (p. 28), “People are more satisfied in particular relationships and situations to the extent that their desired identity images are supported, validated, or elicited” (p.93 – Schlenker 1985). The way in which virtual reality extends this possibility was poignantly represented in the segment of the CBC video featuring the young man with Cerebral Palsy dancing at the disco in Second Life. But this statement struck me as universally true in the FtF world as well.

In my “real world” and “real community” I am working to design a youth-based civic network. These readings/ viewings / listenings were useful in helping me to start thinking about which aspects of the community problem solving process might be best conducted online v. offline, synchronous v. asynchronous, etc. Generally, how to use the features of CMC to lower the barriers of participation among young people and enhance communication between young people and adults in the community. A couple of ideas that resonated were the use of anonymous structures for brainstorming (but not decision making), and thinking about use of the Web as a presentation / publishing tool more than as a communication / process tool.