DOCSLIB.ORG

Online Communities and Social Networking

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Online Communities and Social Networking 45 Chapter 1.4 Online Communities and Social Networking Abhijit Roy University of Scranton, USA INTRODUCTION DEFINITION Technology has enabled communities to move be- A “community” refers to an evolving group of yondthephysicalface-to-facecontactstotheonline people communicating and acting together to reach realm of the World Wide Web. With the advent of a common goal. It creates a sense of membership the highways in the 1950s and 1960s, “communi- through involvement or shared common interests. ties” were created in suburbia. The Internet, on the It has been considered to be a closed system with other hand, has over the last two decades, enabled relativelystablemembershipanddemonstrateslittle the creation of a myriad of “online communities” or no connection to other communities (Anderson, (Green, 2007) that have limitless boundaries across 1999). every corner of the globe. With the rapid growth of the Internet, the geo- This essay will begin by providing a definition graphic boundaries constraining the limits of com- of the term “online communities” and then describ- munities are no longer a factor, and the functions of ing several typologies of this phenomenon. The maintaining a community can be fulfilled virtually various motivations for joining communities, how fromanywhereintheglobe.Thisisthebasicessence marketers create social bonds that enhance social of an online community, which is also synonymous relationships, as well as strategies used by firms with e-community or virtual community. Several in building online communities are also discussed. authorshaveattemptedtoprovideaformaldefinition We conclude by discussing strategies for managing of the term for semantic clarifications. The major online communities, leveraging them for social definitions are as follows: networking, researching them, as well as directions for future research. • Social aggregations that emerge from the Net when enough people carry on public DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60566-014-1.ch145 Copyright © 2010, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. Online Communities and Social Networking discussions long enough, with sufficient TYPOLOGIES OF ONLINE human feeling, to form webs of personal COMMUNITIES relationships in cyberspace. (Rheingold, 1993) Online communities come in different shapes and • Groups of people who communicate with sizes and may have memberships of a few dozen each other via electronic media, rather than tomillionsofindividuals.Thesecommunitiesmay face-to-face. (Romm, Pliskin, & Clarke extend from active forums like discussion groups 1997) and chat rooms to passive ones like e-mails and • Computer mediated spaces where there is a bulletin boards. Given that these communities potential for an integration of content and are not geographically constrained, their size communication with an emphasis on mem- can be much bigger than typical physical com- ber generated content. (Hagel & Armstrong munities and many millions of them exist on the 1997) Internet. Uncovering archetype or gestalt patterns • Online Publics are symbolically delineated is fundamental to the study of social science and computer mediated spaces, whose exis- research, and several authors have proposed clas- tence is relatively transparent and open, sification schemes for configurations of online that allow groups of individuals to attend communities. and contribute to a similar set of computer- Lee, Vogel, and Limayem (2003) in their mediated interpersonal interactions. (Jones review of classification schemes of online com- & Rafaeli, 2000) munities identify Hagel and Armstrong’s (1997) andJonesandRafaeli’s(2000)typologiesasbeing While Rheingold (1993) provides one of the the most popularly referenced. Kozinets (2002) earliest definitions of the term, and one that is too delineates four kinds of online communities. most quoted in the literature (Kozinets, 2002), These three typologies are reviewed, and a further many may question whether “with sufficient hu- popular typology of affinity groups proposed by man feeling” is a necessary condition for online MacchietteandRoy(1992)asappliedtotheonline community formation. Romm et al.’s (1997) environment is also proposed. definition may not sufficiently distinguish it from Hagel and Armstrong (1997) propose four general Web sites. Hagel and Armstrong (1997) major types of online communities based on emphasizemembergeneratedcontent,whileJones people’s desire to meet basic human needs: inter- and Rafaeli (2000) use the term “virtual publics” est, relationship, fantasy, and transaction. Jones instead of online community. Others, like Bishop and Rafaeli (2000) further segment these com- (2007), have pointed to the phenomenon of “de- munities by social structure, that is, communities socialization” or less frequent interaction with formed based on social networks, for example, human in traditional settings, as a consequence online voluntary associations, cyber inns, and of an increase in virtual socialization in online so forth, and technology base, that is, types of communities. Based on the above definitions technology platforms, for example, e-mail lists, the term may be simply defined as a group of Usenet groups, and so forth. individuals with common interests who interact Kozinets (2002) proposed the four types of with one another on the Internet. communities as dungeons, that is, online environ- ments where players interact, such as for online video games, circles,(intereststructuredcollection of common interests), rooms(computer-mediated environmentswherepeopleinteractsociallyinreal 46 Online Communities and Social Networking time), and boards (online communities organized these communities. The various components of around interest specific bulletin boards). the model are discussed next. Finally, Macchiette and Roy (1992) proposed a typology of affinity communities that can also Motivations be used for classifying online communities. They defined communities as either being: professional A member’s reasons for joining a community (e.g., doctors, lawyers, etc.), common interest(e.g., may depend on a wide range of factors, such as hobbies, interests), demographic (e.g., by gender, affiliation (others like them are members of the age, etc.), cause-based (e.g., Sierra Club, Green community), information (about experiences, Peace), and marketer generated (e.g., Disney, ideas, and issues), recreation (meeting people, Nintendo) communities. These communities may playing around, sharing stories, etc.), or transac- also be constructed in the online environment. tion (e.g., those who join a Web site for buying Itisalsointerestingtomakeotherdichotomous and trading possessions). distinctions of online communities such as: (a) between formal (e.g., associations) vs. informal Mode of Participation communities, (b) commercial(whichoffersgoods and services to make revenues that in turn fuels Participation can occur in a myriad of ways, for community operations) vs. noncommercial(com- example, through e-mails, chat rooms, discussion munities created from the ground up by a group groups, online events, blogs, social networking of individuals, e.g., with an interest in stamp col- Web sites (e.g., MySpace, Facebook, Orkut, etc.), lection), and (c) open or public (where everyone sharing photographs (e.g., Flickr), wikis (e.g., regardless of their qualifications and individual Wikipedia),bulletinboards,andsoon.Some(such profile can enter the community and participate) as discussion groups, chat rooms) have more ac- vs. closed or private (where outsiders are not al- tive members than passive members (e.g., e-mail, lowed into the community, or where membership bulletin board or posting, or watching viewing is very difficult to obtain). content on You Tube). Characteristics of Online ONLINE COMMUNITIES: Communities MOTIVATIONS, MODE OF PARTICIPATION, With the growth and maturity of online com- CHARACTERISTICS, AND BENEFITS munities, certain characteristics are prevalent. Adler and Christopher (1999) identify six such Rayport and Jaworski (2004) present a model of characteristics: how the various components of an online com- munity can be integrated. An adapted version of • Cohesion: Members seek a sense of be- the model is shown in Figure 1. longing and develop group identity over The model illustrates how members’ motiva- time. tionsforjoiningtheonlinecommunity,theirmode • Relationships: Community members in- of participation, and the community’s degree teract and develop friendships over time. of connectedness in many ways determine the • Effectiveness: The group has an impact on characteristics of the community, which in turn members’ lives. influences the benefits sought by the members in 47 Online Communities and Social Networking Figure 1. Online communities: Motivations, mode of participation, characteristics, and benefits • Help: Community members feel comfort- • Self-Regulation: The community devel- able asking and receiving help from each ops a system for policing itself and sets other. ground rules of operation. • Language: Members develop shared com- munication tools that have a unique mean- Benefits to Members ing within the community. Adler and Christopher (1999) further point out thatthemembersoftheonlinecommunitydevelop 48 Online Communities and Social Networking variousemotional benefitsdepending on the com- 2. Novices: They are new members or “new- munities that they join. They include inclusion, bies” who are usually passive and are busy shared information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How to Find the Best Hashtags for Your Business Hashtags Are a Simple Way to Boost Your Traffic and Target Specific Online Communities
    CHECKLIST How to find the best hashtags for your business Hashtags are a simple way to boost your traffic and target specific online communities. This checklist will show you everything you need to know— from the best research tools to tactics for each social media network. What is a hashtag? A hashtag is keyword or phrase (without spaces) that contains the # symbol. Marketers tend to use hashtags to either join a conversation around a particular topic (such as #veganhealthchat) or create a branded community (such as Herschel’s #WellTravelled). HOW TO FIND THE BEST HASHTAGS FOR YOUR BUSINESS 1 WAYS TO USE 3 HASHTAGS 1. Find a specific audience Need to reach lawyers interested in tech? Or music lovers chatting about their favorite stereo gear? Hashtags are a simple way to find and reach niche audiences. 2. Ride a trend From discovering soon-to-be viral videos to inspiring social movements, hashtags can quickly connect your brand to new customers. Use hashtags to discover trending cultural moments. 3. Track results It’s easy to monitor hashtags across multiple social channels. From live events to new brand campaigns, hashtags both boost engagement and simplify your reporting. HOW TO FIND THE BEST HASHTAGS FOR YOUR BUSINESS 2 HOW HASHTAGS WORK ON EACH SOCIAL NETWORK Twitter Hashtags are an essential way to categorize content on Twitter. Users will often follow and discover new brands via hashtags. Try to limit to two or three. Instagram Hashtags are used to build communities and help users find topics they care about. For example, the popular NYC designer Jessica Walsh hosts a weekly Q&A session tagged #jessicasamamondays.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Proceedings of the Fifteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2021) A Large Open Dataset from the Parler Social Network Max Aliapoulios1, Emmi Bevensee2, Jeremy Blackburn3, Barry Bradlyn4, Emiliano De Cristofaro5, Gianluca Stringhini6, Savvas Zannettou7 1New York University, 2SMAT, 3Binghamton University, 4University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 5University College London, 6Boston University, 7Max Planck Institute for Informatics [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract feasible in technical terms to create a new social media plat- Parler is as an “alternative” social network promoting itself form, but marketing the platform towards specific polarized as a service that allows to “speak freely and express yourself communities is an extremely successful strategy to bootstrap openly, without fear of being deplatformed for your views.” a user base. In other words, there is a subset of users on Twit- Because of this promise, the platform become popular among ter, Facebook, Reddit, etc., that will happily migrate to a new users who were suspended on mainstream social networks platform, especially if it advertises moderation policies that for violating their terms of service, as well as those fearing do not restrict the growth and spread of political polariza- censorship. In particular, the service was endorsed by several tion, conspiracy theories, extremist ideology, hateful and vi- conservative public figures, encouraging people to migrate olent speech, and mis- and dis-information. from traditional social networks. After the storming of the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, Parler has been progressively de- Parler.
    [Show full text]
  • Effectiveness of Dismantling Strategies on Moderated Vs. Unmoderated
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Efectiveness of dismantling strategies on moderated vs. unmoderated online social platforms Oriol Artime1*, Valeria d’Andrea1, Riccardo Gallotti1, Pier Luigi Sacco2,3,4 & Manlio De Domenico 1 Online social networks are the perfect test bed to better understand large-scale human behavior in interacting contexts. Although they are broadly used and studied, little is known about how their terms of service and posting rules afect the way users interact and information spreads. Acknowledging the relation between network connectivity and functionality, we compare the robustness of two diferent online social platforms, Twitter and Gab, with respect to banning, or dismantling, strategies based on the recursive censor of users characterized by social prominence (degree) or intensity of infammatory content (sentiment). We fnd that the moderated (Twitter) vs. unmoderated (Gab) character of the network is not a discriminating factor for intervention efectiveness. We fnd, however, that more complex strategies based upon the combination of topological and content features may be efective for network dismantling. Our results provide useful indications to design better strategies for countervailing the production and dissemination of anti- social content in online social platforms. Online social networks provide a rich laboratory for the analysis of large-scale social interaction and of their social efects1–4. Tey facilitate the inclusive engagement of new actors by removing most barriers to participate in content-sharing platforms characteristic of the pre-digital era5. For this reason, they can be regarded as a social arena for public debate and opinion formation, with potentially positive efects on individual and collective empowerment6.
    [Show full text]
  • Society, Community, and Development: a Tale of Two Regions
    Michael Storper, Lena Lavinas and Alejandro Mercado- Célis Society, community, and development: a tale of two regions Book section Original citation: Originally published in Polenske, Karen, The economic geography of innovation. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp. 310-339. © 2007 Cambridge University Press This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/4882/ Available in LSE Research Online: May 2008 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s submitted version of the book section. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. 0 SOCIETY, COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT:1 A Tale of Two Regions Michael Storper Lena Lavinas Alejandro Mercado Célis Storper: Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris and London School of Economics Lavinas : Institute of Economics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro ([email protected]) Mercado : Universidad Nacional Autónoma
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Gab? a Bastion of Free Speech Or an Alt-Right Echo Chamber?
    What is Gab? A Bastion of Free Speech or an Alt-Right Echo Chamber? Savvas Zannettou Barry Bradlyn Emiliano De Cristofaro Cyprus University of Technology Princeton Center for Theoretical Science University College London [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Haewoon Kwak Michael Sirivianos Gianluca Stringhini Qatar Computing Research Institute Cyprus University of Technology University College London & Hamad Bin Khalifa University [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Jeremy Blackburn University of Alabama at Birmingham [email protected] ABSTRACT ACM Reference Format: Over the past few years, a number of new “fringe” communities, Savvas Zannettou, Barry Bradlyn, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Haewoon Kwak, like 4chan or certain subreddits, have gained traction on the Web Michael Sirivianos, Gianluca Stringhini, and Jeremy Blackburn. 2018. What is Gab? A Bastion of Free Speech or an Alt-Right Echo Chamber?. In WWW at a rapid pace. However, more often than not, little is known about ’18 Companion: The 2018 Web Conference Companion, April 23–27, 2018, Lyon, how they evolve or what kind of activities they attract, despite France. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3184558. recent research has shown that they influence how false informa- 3191531 tion reaches mainstream communities. This motivates the need to monitor these communities and analyze their impact on the Web’s information ecosystem. 1 INTRODUCTION In August 2016, a new social network called Gab was created The Web’s information ecosystem is composed of multiple com- as an alternative to Twitter.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Course Outline for SOCL
    Common Course Outline SOCL 101 Introduction to Sociology 3 Credits Community College of Baltimore County Description SOCL 101 – 3 credits – Introduction to Sociology examines social interactions and the use of sociological perspectives to explain the individual relationships , as well as interactions among the groups and societies that shape them. It covers basic concepts such as culture, socialization, social inequality, social power, deviance, social control, institutions, and global issues. 3 credits Prerequisites: ACLT 052 or ACLT 053 Overall Course Objectives Upon completion of this course students will be able to: 1. assess the sociological perspective and its development in studying human behavior; 2. compare and contrast the macro and micro sociological approaches in examining social structure and social interaction; 3. evaluate the importance of social institutions including marriage, family, the media, educational, political and economic structures in a diverse and global society; 4. evaluate major sociological theories by focusing on the main concepts, ideas and critical assessment of each theory from a historical, social and political context; 5. apply the sociological perspective when using technology to evaluate and validate information; 6. find, evaluate, use, and cite appropriate academic resources related to sociological topics; 7. apply the steps in the scientific research process, utilizing technology and appropriate academic resources, to analyze or design a sociological study; 8. examine the nature of culture, subcultures, social norms, ethnocentrism, and cultural relativism with a focus on diversity appreciation and ethical awareness; 9. describe the theories and processes of socialization on the development of the self and lifelong learning; 10. assess patterns of social interaction using the concepts: status, role, primary group, and secondary group; 11.
    [Show full text]
  • CDC Social Media Guidelines: Facebook Requirements and Best Practices
    Social Media Guidelines and Best Practices Facebook Purpose This document is designed to provide guidance to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention employees and contractors on the process for planning and development, as well as best practices for participating and engaging, on the social networking site Facebook. Background Facebook is a social networking service launched in February 2004. As of March 2012, Facebook has more than 901 million active users, who generate an average of 3.2 billion Likes and Comments per day. For additional information on Facebook, visit http://newsroom.fb.com/. The first CDC Facebook page, managed by the Office of the Associate Director for Communication Science (OADC), Division of News and Electronic Media (DNEM), Electronic Media Branch (EMB), was launched in May 2009 to share featured health and safety updates and to build an active and participatory community around the work of the agency. The agency has expanded its Facebook presence beyond the main CDC profile, and now supports multiple Facebook profiles connecting users with information on a range of CDC health and safety topics. Communications Strategy Facebook, as with other social media tools, is intended to be part of a larger integrated health communications strategy or campaign developed under the leadership of the Associate Director of Communication Science (ADCS) in the Health Communication Science Office (HCSO) of CDC’s National Centers, Institutes, and Offices (CIOs). Clearance and Approval 1. New Accounts: As per the CDC Enterprise Social Media policy (link not available outside CDC network): • All new Facebook accounts must be cleared by the program’s HCSO office.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Online Communities
    An Introduction to Online Communities by Helen Baxter Community Manager KnowledgeBoard.com Sift, 100 Victoria Street, Bristol, BS1 6HZ, 0117 915 9600, www.sift.co.uk For more details contact Richard Dennys, [email protected] Introduction by Helen Baxter I have been involved in online communities since 1994, first as a member, then community producer, and am now Community Manager of Knowledgeboard.com, the portal for the EC's Knowledge Management Forum. I have made many great friends over the years through online communities and even 'met' my husband online. I think that the increasing success of online communities stems from the fact that they harness the way that people naturally use the Internet. It is the innate human nature to communicate and build relationships that has driven the development of the Internet as we see it today. Ever since the network was opened up to the academic establishment in the 1970s, 'online' or 'virtual' communities have formed. In real life most communities are formed through geographical proximity, but online communities are mostly formed around a shared interest or need, and are a powerful tool for building trust and relationships, word of mouth marketing, and knowledge acquisition and exchange. This 'Introduction to Online Communities' has been written to give an overview of the different types of online community, what makes an online community, and the various community tools. Every community is unique and it is difficult to give a guaranteed recipe for success, but I will cover common factors found in every good online community. It is also worth remembering that as in real life communities take time to grow, and will continually evolve.
    [Show full text]
  • I Facebook and Panopticism: Healthy Curiosity Or Stalking?
    Facebook and Panopticism: Healthy Curiosity or Stalking? A thesis presented to the faculty of the Scripps College of Communication of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Mary Catherine Kennedy November 2009 © 2009. Mary Catherine Kennedy. All Rights Reserved. i This thesis titled Facebook and Panopticism: Healthy Curiosity or Stalking? by MARY CATHERINE KENNEDY has been approved for the School of Media Arts and Studies and the Scripps College of Communication by Karen E. Riggs Professor of Media Arts and Studies Gregory J. Shepherd Dean, Scripps College of Communication ii ABSTRACT KENNEDY, MARY C., M.A., November 2009, Telecommunications Facebook and Panopticism: Healthy Curiosity or Stalking? (108 pp.) Director of Thesis: Karen E. Riggs This study deepens existing knowledge concerning social networking sites, with specific interest in the social networking site Facebook and the phenomenon, “Facebook stalking”. By providing insights into lesser-known studies concerning user curiosity and surveillance online, the present research reveals that the terms ‘monitoring’ and ‘keeping up with’ or ‘keeping in touch with’ are most commonly used when referring to social searches within social networks; only when asked to think about surveillance in terms of stalking did interview participants refer to it as such. The present study aims to discover Facebook users’ perception of their friends’ disclosure while delving into the idea of “Facebook stalking”, specifically with regard to how users define it. Facebook’s evolution and prominence in the public sphere is dependent upon user satisfaction with and general understanding of the functionality of social networking websites. A discussion of these issues is beneficial to understanding how Facebook is used as a modern-day panopticon.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Services and Community Justice
    BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN MAJOR HUMAN SERVICES AND COMMUNITY JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELING AND HUMAN SERVICES 524 West 59th Street, New York, NY 10019 ¢ New Building, 8.65.26 ¢ 212-393-6883 www.jjay.cuny.edu/department-counseling-human-services See all major requirements at: www.jjay.cuny.edu/human-services-and-community-justice-major-resources WHAT WILL YOU LEARN IN THIS MAJOR? The Human Services and Community Justice (HSCJ) major is designed to train students in the practice and theory of human services. Students in the major will progress through a series of required core courses, designed to prepare them to be self-reflective, competent and compas- sionate practitioners, change agents, advocates, and community lead- ers. Students will examine issues of social, racial, and economic injustice, and the challenges encountered by diverse and underserved populations in society. Through multidisciplinary coursework, students will develop a rich appreciation for diverse human systems and interventions, justice and advocacy, and policy and administration, promoting a “just” society. IN THIS MAJOR YOU WILL nnn FIRST COURSES IN THE MAJOR nnn Read journal articles and textbooks. CHS 150: Foundations of Human Services Understand human services values, attitudes and Counseling ethics and their appropriate application in practice to AFR 145: Introduction to Community Justice culture, ethnicity, race, class, gender, religion/spiritual- in Human Systems ity, ability, sexual orientation, and other expressions of AFR 227: Community Based Approaches diversity. to Justice Engage with diverse faculty and social and advocacy CHS 230: Culture, Direct Services & Community groups, examining the dynamics of power, values Practice and equity of public service, civic activism and CHS 235: Theories of Assessment and transformational organizational change.
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunities and Challenges for Standardization in Mobile Social Networks
    Opportunities and Challenges for Standardization in Mobile Social Networks Laurent-Walter Goix, Telecom Italia [email protected] Bryan Sullivan, AT&T [email protected] Abstract This paper describes the opportunities and challenges related to the standardization of interoperable “Mobile Social Networks”. Challenges addressed include the effect of social networks on resource usage, the need for social network federation, and the needs for a standards context. The concept of Mobile Federated Social Networks as defined in the OMA SNEW specification is introduced as an approach to some of these challenges. Further specific needs and opportunities in standards and developer support for mobile social apps are described, including potentially further work in support of regulatory requirements. Finally, we conclude that a common standard is needed for making mobile social networks interoperable, while addressing privacy concerns from users & institutions as well as the differentiations of service providers. 1 INTRODUCTION Online Social Networks (OSN) are dominated by Walled Gardens that have attracted users by offering new paradigms of communication / content exchange that better fit their modern lifestyle. Issues are emerging related to data ownership, privacy and identity management and some institutions such as the European Commission have started to provide measures for controlling this. The impressive access to OSN from ever smarter mobile devices, as well as the growth of mobile- specific SN services (e.g. WhatsApp) have further stimulated the mobile industry that is already starving for new attractive services (RCS 1). In this context OMA 2 as mobile industry forum has recently promoted the SNEW specifications that can leverage network services such as user identity and native interoperability of mobile networks (the approach promoted by “federated social networks”).
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Social Capital?
    OECD Insights: Human Capital What is social capital? The concept of social capital became fashionable only relatively recently, but the term has been in use for almost a century while the ideas behind it go back further still. “Social capital” may first have appeared in a book published in 1916 in the United States that dis- cussed how neighbours could work together to oversee schools. Author Lyda Hanifan referred to social capital as “those tangible assets [that] count for most in the daily lives of people: namely goodwill, fellowship, sympathy, and social intercourse among the individuals and families who make up a social unit”. That gives some sense of what’s meant by social capital, although today it would be hard to come up with a single definition that sat- isfied everyone. For the sake of simplicity, however, we can think of social capital as the links, shared values and understandings in society that enable individuals and groups to trust each other and so work together. In recent years, the term entered the popular imagination with the publication in 2000 of Robert Putnam’s bestseller, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Putnam argued that while Americans have become wealthier their sense of commu- nity has withered. Cities and traditional suburbs have given way to “edge cities” and “exurbs” – vast, anonymous places where people sleep and work and do little else. As people spend more and more time in the office, commuting to work and watching TV alone, there’s less time for joining community groups and voluntary organ- isations, and socialising with neighbours, friends and even family.
    [Show full text]