Bowling Alone, But Online Together? Virtual Communities and American Public Life Felicia Wu Song Charlottesville, Virginia B.A., Yale University, 1994 M.A., Northwestern University, 1996 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Sociology University of Virginia May, 2005 Bowling Alone, but Online Together? Virtual Communities and American Public Life Felicia Wu Song James Davison Hunter, Chair Department of Sociology University of Virginia ABSTRACT The integration of new communication technologies into the fabric of everyday life has raised important questions about their effects on existing conceptions and practices of community, relationship, and personal identity. How do these technologies mediate and reframe our experience of social interactions and solidarity? What are the cultural and social implications of the structural changes that they introduce? This dissertation critically considers these questions by examining the social and technological phenomenon of online communities and their role in the ongoing debates about the fate of American civil society. In light of growing concerns over declining levels of trust and civic participation expressed by scholars such as Robert Putnam, many point to online communities as possible catalysts for revitalizing communal life and American civic culture. To many, online communities appear to render obsolete not only the barriers of space and time, but also problems of exclusivity and prejudice. Yet others remain skeptical of the Internet's capacity to produce the types of communities necessary for building social capital. After reviewing and critiquing the dominant perspectives on evaluating the democratic efficacy of online communities, this dissertation suggests an alternative approach that draws from the conceptual distinctions made by Mark E. Warren's political theory of associations. ii A content analysis of thirty online communities was conducted to determine their dominant stuctural and institutional features. The findings show that online communities tend to have high ease of exit, are socially constituted and oriented towards exclusive group identity goods. Producing a relatively narrow range of democratic effects, they are conducive to fostering inner-group trust, personal efficacy, and the public representation of difference. They are poor sources of mutual obligation, reciprocity, deliberative skills, and trust and cooperation with those outside the group. Moreover, in taking into consideration the market's institutional role in the development and management of online groups, they appear to illustrate and epitomize the commodification of community and the fate of public life in a consumer culture. Under such institutional conditions, it is difficult to see how online communities can substantively help revitalize American civil society. Ill TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 111 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IV CHAPTER 1 1 The Virtual Community CHAPTER2 22 Media, Technology, and Democracy: Debating the "Community" Problem CHAPTER3 60 The Landscape of Virtual Communities CHAPTER4 108 An Alternative Framework for Virtual Communities CHAPTERS 142 The Commodificationof Community CHAPTER6 176 Conclusion APPENDIX 182 REFERENCES 185 IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Without the financial support from the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, this dissertation would have been impossible to complete. Even more importantly, the Institute's intellectual community-a rare combination of graduate students, junior and senior scholars-has been essential to sustaining and developing the ideas and sensibilities that have animated this project. In addition to the critical questions and insightful feedback that many offered during Institute colloquium presentations, I am especially thankful for the Culture 5 Group that organically grew out of the Fellow's program. For almost two years, this group whose members included Josh Yates, Markella Rutherford, Dustin Kidd, and Glenn Lucke not only offered helpful comments on several early chapters, but also proved to be a vital source of camaraderie through the dissertation-writing process. Chuck Mathewes' assignment of Mark E. Warren's Democrary and Association serendipitously provided me with the central conceptual framework that made this dissertation work. Professor Mark Warren himself kindly offered comments and suggestions on the application of his theory to the online associational terrain. Feedback from audiences at Williams College, Tufts University, Messiah College, Eastern Sociological Society, Southern Sociological Society and American Sociological Association meetings were valuable as well. My committee members Sarah Corse, Krishan Kumar, and Bernie Carlson offered perspectives and posed questions that have significantly shaped this dissertation. Most of all, I am indebted to my advisor, James Davison Hunter, for the years of instruction, intellectual prodding, and encouragement that he has offered. I am grateful for his enthusiasm for my work and all the time he devoted to reading and discussing chapters and drafts. On a personal level, I must thank my parents, brother and sister-in-law for their confidence in me and steadfast encouragement. To my nephew and nieces, I thank you for faithfully praying that your aunt would "finish her homework." I am grateful for my father­ and mother-in-law who graciously provided childcare, meals, and a place to get away at crucial moments. My daughter, Hannah Eleanor, played a key role in motivating me to complete this final stage of graduate work through her birth and life. And finally to my husband Ed who, upon finishinghis own dissertation, proceeded to be a most extraordinary father, cook, therapist, editor, conversation partner, and companion, I express my deepest gratitude. CHAPTER ONE THE VIRTUAL COMMUNITY How [do} free, critical(y-thinking individuals... sustain a public-spirited community of citizens.... Our on(y choice is not one between an aggregate of individuals without common public concern and a pre-modern community organized around a single substantive idea of the common good Envisaging the modern democratic political community outside ofthis dichotomy is the crucial challenge... -Chantal Moujfe "The virtual community." Much like the popular notion of the global village, the term suggests an apparent oxymoron, a paradox. How can a "community," traditionally understood to be locally-based and embodied, be "virtual"? To what extent is a strong sense of belonging, stable membership, common vision and even interpersonal intimacy possible through the Internet-a tool that technologically connects computers servers (not people) to each other? Despite these common questions and doubts, the apparent paradox of the "virtual community" is in fact the very source of its appeal. For in these computer-mediated groups on the Internet, individuals have the benefit of sharing their deepest secrets, and yet never risk their personal privacy. Virtual communities can deliver a strong sense of belonging without the burden of distasteful coercion or parochialism. Members can connect with their community at any time, while managing when the community or other members enters their own life according to their convenience. Job mobility and other life changes that normally alter an individual's capacity to stay connected to a local community have little or no effect in a virtual community. Virtual communities promise to free people from the limitations of their local neighborhood or workplace, allowing them to seek and find affinity groups from all around the world as easily as discovering those in their local neighborhood. Individuals who have been 2 marginalized for their race, gender, class, or physical condition, not only can easily find others who share the experience of bearing a stigmatized identity, but also socialize without ever having their physical features or status hinder their interactions. Instead, there is the sense that people's "true selves" might finally revealed and sustained free of their physical limitations. Last, but perhaps greatest of all, if a group's dynamics change for the worst, or if an individual's own life demands a change in involvement or commitment, leaving and finding another group can be easily done with little or no consequence. The apparent paradox of the "virtual community" then is not, for most, a cause for concern, but rather a source of hope. For, as political theorist William Galston suggests, "if we are linked to others by choice rather than accident, if our interaction with them is shaped by mutual adjustment rather than hierarchical authority, and if we can set aside these bonds whenever they clash with our individual interests, then the lamb of connection can lie down with the lion of autonomy" (1999, p.8). This, at least, is the hope of virtual communities. Even from its infancy, the Internet has promised to transform not only the economic realities of commerce and globalization in the current information society, but also the social and institutional realities of the American political landscape. Though the Internet has been infused with sufficient amounts of excitement and enthusiasm, several important questions remain: How do new communication technologies mediate and reframe our everyday experience of social interactions? What are the cultural and social implications of structural changes that such technologies might bring to social interaction? What quality of autonomy