My Tribe: Post-Subcultural Manifestations of Belonging on Social Network Sites Author(S): Brady Robards and Andy Bennett Source: Sociology, Vol

Home , Tribe (Internet)

My Tribe: Post-subcultural Manifestations of Belonging on Social Network Sites Author(s): Brady Robards and Andy Bennett Source: Sociology, Vol. 45, No. 2 (APRIL 2011), pp. 303-317 Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42857540 Accessed: 27-04-2015 05:23 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Article

Sociology 45(2)303-317 MyTribe: Post-subcultural ©TheAuthor(s) 2011 Reprintsandpermission: sagepub. Manifestations of Belonging co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI:10.1 177/0038038510394025 on Social Network Sites soc.sagepub.com (USAGE

Brady Robards GriffithUniversity, Australia

Andy Bennett GriffithUniversity, Australia

Abstract Sincethe early2000s, sociologists of youthhave been engagedin a debateconcerning the relevanceof 'subculture' as a theoreticalframework inthe light of morerecent postmodern- influencedinterpretations ofyouth identities as fluid, dynamic and reflexively constructed. Utilizing ethnographicdata collected on theGold Coast inQueensland, Australia, this article considers suchdebates in relation to socialnetwork sites such as MySpaceand Facebook. Although online identityexpression has been interpreted as exhibiting subcultural qualities, preliminary empirical researchinforming this article lends itself to a moreneo-tribal reading.

Keywords identity,neo-tribe, networking, social network site, subculture, youth

Thisarticle investigates the post-subcultural turn in youth cultural studies with reference to onlinesocial networksites. Although there is a growingbody of literatureexamining thesocial significanceof social networksites for youth, little attempt has beenmade in thisliterature to map thepatterns of onlineengagement and interactionbetween young peoplewith reference to theongoing subculture/post-subculture debate in otherareas of youthcultural studies. A centralcontention of thearticle is that,although such forms of engagementand interactionostensibly exhibit subcultural characteristics, when sub- jectedto empiricalscrutiny a morepost-subcultural quality becomes evident in young people'severyday use andperception of social networksites. The articleis dividedinto fourmain parts. In thefirst part we explorethe subculture/post-subculture debate in more

Correspondingauthor: BradyRobards, G30 Level 4, Griffith University, GoldCoast, Australia 4222. Email:[email protected]

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 304 Sociology45(2) depthand also considerextant work on youngpeople's everydayuse of information communicationtechnologies. In thesecond part of the article we outlinethe methodological approachunderpinning the empirical research that informs our findings. The thirdpart of thearticle presents an in-depthdiscussion of our findings; through close analysisof interviewee responses,we endeavourto illustratethe extentto whichthe virtual spaces of communicationoffered by social networksites appear to accentuateexisting trends towardsreflexively derived, identity projects as identifiedby post-subcultural theorists in earlierwork. In thefinal part of the article, we suggestthat although our findings tend to supportexisting post-subcultural explanations of youth culture, particularly those inspired byneo-tribe theory, at thesame time they offer new ways of understanding the nature and significanceof such post-subcultural forms of association among young people.

Subculture to post-subculture The conceptof subcultureacquired ready usage in researchon patternsof youth leisure andstyle through the work of the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) (see Hall andJefferson, 1976). Borrowing 'subculture' from the Chicago School, whereit had been used to constructa sociologicalexplanation of youthdeviance (e.g. Becker,1963; Merton, 1957), the CCCS adaptedthe concept as a meansof providing an interpretationof the stylisticresponses of youngworking-class males in post-Second WorldWar Britain. According to theCCCS, post-warBritish youth subcultures, by dint of theirquasi-gang structure, were illustrative of continuingexpressions of class-based solidarityamong working-class youth. The CCCS workprovided theoretical tools for movingbeyond the pessimistic reading of mass popularculture offered by Frankfurt School writers,such as Adornoand Horkheimer(1969), and mass culturaltheorists, notablyMacDonald (1953). The CCCS did notregard working-class consumers as pas- sive recipientsof mass culturalproducts, but rather saw such productsas a leverfor formsof hegemonic struggle. Subsequent CCCS workon youthby Hebdige (1979) provided a moreelaborate interpretation of working-class youth's use of styleand other resourcesin whathe referredto as semioticguerrilla warfare. Using Lévi-Strauss's (1966) conceptof bricolage and Barthes' (1977) conceptof signifyingpractice, Hebdige consideredhow thevisually spectacular image of punkrock in late 1970sBritain reso- natedwith the socio-economic climate of an industrialnation in decline. The dominanceof subcultural theory held sway in youth cultural studies until the late 1990swhen a new seriesof criticaldebates emerged concerning the continuing validity of theconcept of subculturevis-a-vis an alternativetheoretical paradigm referred to as 'post-subculture'.Originally coined by Redhead(1990), theterm post-subculture was substantiallydeveloped, and theorized,by Muggleton(2000) in worksuggesting that contemporaryyouth culture can no longerbe regardedas a directreflection of class background;rather, argues Muggleton, youth identities today are a productof individual choice and reflectthe heightenedreflexivity that is partand parcel of late modern, consumer-basedsocieties (see also Chaney,2004; Miles,2000). Similarly,in work focusing on youthand music, Bennett (1999, 2000) arguesthat the collectiveexpressions of contemporary youth, rather than adhering to thefixity of class- and neighbourhood-basedsubcultures as depicted,for example, in thework of Brake

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robarásand Bennett 305

(1985), exhibitqualities more closely associated with what French sociologist Maffesoli termsneo-tribes. According to Maffesoli, neo-tribes are 'withoutthe rigidity of the forms of organisationwith which we are familiar,[tribe] refers more to a certainambience, a stateof mind, and is preferablyto be expressedthrough lifestyles that favour appearance and form'(1996: 98). The deploymentof neo-tribe theory in youthcultural research has been such thatit has become a significantelement in the post-subculturalturn (e.g. Cummings,2006; Luckman,2003; St John,2003 ). The subculture/post-subculturedebate has continued,giving rise to a seriesof critical positionson thecontinuing currency - ornot - ofsubculture as a meaningfulconcept for understandingthe leisure practices of contemporary youth. Hodkinson (2004) has argued thatwhile post-subcultural theory may be ofrelevance for some aspects of contemporary youthcultural practice, for example in relationto dance culture,other youth cultural groupingssuch as 'goth' exhibitqualities of collectiveand stylisticfixity that adhere moreclosely to conventionalsubcultural readings. In a similarfashion, Shildrick and MacDonald(2006) suggestthat class-based inequality continues to playa criticalrole in manyneighbourhoods and regions, impacting on access to leisureresources and strongly informingyoung people's sense of themselvesand theirpeer group allegiances. Finally, Robertset al. (2009) contendthat geographic location can also play a crucialpart in determiningyoung people's aestheticattachment to, and understandingof, leisure resources.One notablefacet of this, argue Roberts et al., is thatthose young people living in regionsoutside the central power bases forleisure capitalism, such as EasternEurope andparts of the Russian Federation, often tend to exhibitfar more conservative and stable tastesin music,fashion and associated leisure practices. Significantly,despite the high level of debate concerning this topic, little attention has beenpaid to itssignificance for our understanding of youngpeople's use of theinternet and social media.As a social phenomenon,the internet has had a powerfuland lasting impacton theconfiguration and operationof western(and, increasingly,non-western) society.Bowker (2007: 21) contendsthat the widespread adoption of the internethas beenas criticalas theadvent of the printing press and the development of written records, althoughits potential, in manyways, even exceeds these paradigmatic shifts. The notion ofthe 'global village', first imagined by McLuhan (1962) inthe 1960s and fully realized in theearly 90s withthe widespread adoption of theinternet, still persists as a powerful metaphor.However, as theinternet is increasinglyembedded into everyday life - thesite uponwhich the 'interplay' between culture and structuretakes place (Bennett,2005: 1) - theglobal village loses itsutopie optimism and its ethereal quality. Instead, the politics of theeveryday, bound by issues of tasteand belongingwhich are centralto thepost- subculturaldebate, become the key concern for the average internet user. While popular discoursearound these issues continuesto build,sociological work in thisarea is still required,if it can be enabledby a renewedsense of focuson theeveryday lives of inter- netusers. Thereare, however, notable exceptions to this gap inthe literature such as Hodkinson's (2002, 2003) workon onlinegoth subculture where the post-subcultural debate meets someresistance. Hodkinson argues that while the internet can potentially'enhance cul- - turalfluidity' (2003: 285) enablinga post-subculturalreading of the space - it 'can also functionto enhanceand intensify the boundaries that separate cultural groupings' (2003:

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 306 Sociology45(2)

285). Thus,Hodkinson identifies the internet as a mediumthat can on theone handrein- forceand perpetuate traditional subcultural models of belonging, while on theother also providinga platformfor multiple intersections of varyingstyles, tastes, lifestyles and culturalpractices, generating a sense of belongingmore consistent with a neo-tribal model.Hodkinson stresses the former through his fieldwork with goths, arguing that just as in offlinesocial situations,individuals online tend to gravitatetowards those with whomthey share some sense of familiarity.However, Hodkinson's later empirical work withLincoln (2008), whichlikens the use of onlinejournals by teenagersto theimpor- tanceof bedrooms as spacesfor the articulation of identity, seems to softenon thispoint somewhat,arguing that 'rather than forming fixed collective groupings . . . youngpeople todayare more likely to . . . [negotiate]personal paths through a myriad of temporary and partialidentities' (Hodkinson and Lincoln,2008: 29). It is not our contentionhere to argueagainst the reality that individuals seek familiarityin social encountersas argued byHodkinson. Rather, we intendto providean additionaldimension to thisargument by consideringand applying a newconfiguration ofonline sociality that centres on theindi- vidualas thepivotal node in a networkof contacts rather than on a sharedsense of style as exemplifiedby Hodkinson's work on goths.We discussthis new conceptualization of onlinesociality and belongingthrough the work of Joinson(2008), Joneset al. (2008) andboyd (2007a, 2007b) in thefollowing section. Kahnand Kellner (2003) offeryet another conceptualization ofsubculture on theinter- netby examiningthe politicized nature of thesegroups. Consistent with Turkle's (1995) reading,Kahn and Kellner argue that identities on theinternet are 'often hybridic and com- plex'with 'post-subcultures' regarded as 'dissolvingclassical cultural and political bound- ariesthat appear too rigid and ideologicalfor Internet life' (2003: 300). However,they go on to identifywhat they term online post-subcultures as also exhibiting'clearly defined politicalorientations' (2003: 300), whichagain reproduces a tensionbetween the unitary andmultiplicitous configurations ofself and belonging appearing in the literature. Othercultural research on theinternet as a wholehas oftentended to take 'subculture' as somethingof a given.Healy, for example, describes the internet 'as a loose collection or "ecosystem"of subcultures'(1997: 65), whileBassett refers to internetchat rooms as 'subculturalspaces' (1997: 538). Similarly,Papacharissi conflates the term subculture withthe notion of 'subnetworks... of tasteor online"caste" systemsthat reinforce or questionexisting inequalities' (2009: 205). Problematically,however, such applications of subcultureappear to stripthe term of its original theoretical context and redeploy it in increasinglyarbitrary and unqualified ways (Bennett, 2004). Moreover,such work often makesassumptions about the relevance of subculture without recourse to empiricaldata. As such,it is verydifficult to gain a sense of thesocial compositionof such internet 'subcultures'and thecommon points of convergence- or not- betweenmembers. To this,of course, must be addedthe increasing distinction between what could be referredto as 'emic'and 'etic'notions of subculture. Thus subculture, once an exclusivelytheoretical terminology,through its incorporationand use in and by thecontemporary media and leisureindustries, has increasinglyentered the realm of vernacular discourse. As Bennett (2004) has argued,such vernacularization ofsubculture has coincidedwith the emergence of theinternet as a new tool of communication- and culturalidentification - between

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robarásand Bennett 307 youngpeople. The internetmay well giverise to new,reflexively constructed notions of subculturethrough which young people include and excludethemselves from particular formsof culturalassociation. Subculture may also be used as a discursivetool through whichyoung people understand themselves as crossingover a seriesof different lifestyle practicesand sensibilities.Indeed, as thisarticle seeks to illustrate,when subjectto empiricalscrutiny, young people's use of theinternet exhibits tendencies that align far morereadily with post-subcultural/neo-tribal types of associationthan with subcultural modelsof explanation.Using empirical data generated by one ofthe authors, the article developsthis argument with reference to specificexamples of social networksite by youngpeople in theGold Coastregion of Australia.

Background and methodology In 2003,the social network site Friendster entered into popular usage in theUSA, effec- tivelybecoming the first widely adopted social networksite (boyd, 2007b: 133). In the same year,MySpace was launched,eventually overtaking Friendster in popularityby 2006, onlyto be overshadowedby Facebookin 2008. Key characteristicsthat each of these sites share includeprofile pictures, autobiographical 'about me' sectionsand friendslists, the latter constituting the networked configuration of thesesites. While dif- ferentsites often include varying features (blogs, forinstance, have operatedslightly differentlyon each site,as has the'status update' and the 'wall/comment' field), they are all,essentially, a collection of user-created profiles which are linked together. These sites have become a key mediumof not only communicationbut also social interaction betweenyoung people. In early2010, Facebook had 500 millionactive users worldwide, 8 millionof whichwere locatedin Australia(Facebook, 2010). Accordingto Hitwise Australia,in August2008, Facebookand MySpace werethe fourthand seventhmost popularonline destinationsin Australiarespectively, attracting 4.2 per cent of all Australianinternet traffic. A yearlater, in October2009, thisreach extended to 7.07 per cent of trafficwith MySpace fallingto twelfthmost popularonline destinationin Australiaand Facebookrising to secondplace. At thetime of writing,in June2010, Facebookalone now accountedfor 8.26 percent of all Australianinternet traffic, still in secondplace afterGoogle, while MySpace had droppedto the 14thmost visited site in Australiawith a trafficshare of 0.41 percent (Hitwise, 2008, 2009, 2010). Qualitativeresearch on howyoung people are using these sites and forwhat purposes has revealedan interestingtrend. Rather than being used to meetnew people,social networksites are insteadbeing used to articulateexisting and oftenoffline networks of friends,family, colleagues and more casual acquaintances.While these sites still provide theopportunity for networking in themore traditional sense of creatingand fostering newsocial relationships, boyd and Ellison have foundthat 'it is notthe primary practice on manyof them'(2007: 2). Similarly,Joinson's (2008: 1029) quantitativeresearch foundthat, amongst Facebook users, the primary use of thesite was to 'keep in touch' withexisting friends. Articulating these networks of 'real' peoplewith whom they share some offlineor tangiblerelationship becomes the centralpractice for many users of social networksites. From an administrativeperspective Facebook itselfidentifies its

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 308 Sociology45(2)

sitenot as a networkingtool but as a social utilityfor friends. Facebook policy actively discouragesusers fromengaging with mainly 'internet-only' contacts on theirsite ('Lauren' in Arrington,2008). Further,Jones et al. foundthat contrary to reportsof MySpace usersoften having large outrageous lists of 'friends'that would be unlikelyto representan offlinenetwork of contacts,the averageuser's networkcontained 145 friendswith 58 per centhaving fewer than 100 (2008: 2). These findingsimply a relatively fixed clusteringof relationshipsand contacts,reminiscent of face-to-face networks. In applyingGoffman's theatrical metaphor of identityperformance to socialnetwork sites,Pearson (2009) examineshow usersconstruct themselves online, enacting a conceptof selfto an imaginedyet sometimes unknown audience.

Theseperformances exist within the imagination ofusers who then use tools and technologies toproject, renegotiate and continuously revise their consensual social hallucination ... to create notonly online selves, but also to createthe staging and setting in whichthese selves exist (Pearson,2009)

While Pearson'sresearch does not addressthe complexityof privacycontrols across social networksites or theawareness of manyusers when it comesto controllingwho can andcannot view their profiles, she does - importantly- draw attention to how online formsof socialitytend to collapsethe front-stage/back-stage modes of performancein Goffman'stheoretical framework. Determining what constitutes friendship on socialnet- worksites is a challengeall usersmust face to determinetheir audience (Robards, 2010). Configuringan appropriateidentity performance can become problematicwhen the potentialaudience may consist of contactsfrom multiple social environments:friends, parents,co-workers, distant relatives, students, mentors and so on. Creatingan authentic and properlycoded 'image' onlineis a complexand heavilyloaded process(Peeters, 2008: 7). However,as thisarticle begins to demonstrate,what may have been a serious hurdleof identity performance previously is simplyanother component of online social- itythat young people are negotiating with and incorporatinginto their everyday lives. Performingidentity online is essentialto facilitatesocial interaction,allowing users to, in Bauman'sterms, 'go on in each others'presence' (1996: 19). boyd arguesthat 'social networksites allow publics to gather'(2007a: 8) in a similarfashion, she argues, to how a shoppingcentre allows people to gatherand socializepublically. When asked aboutthe underlying motivation for participation and the actual activities that constitute participationon social networksites, boyd's youngrespondents provided somewhat vague yetrevealing answers such as 'I don'tknow ... I just hangout,' and 'cuz that's wheremy friends are' (participantsin boyd, 2007a: 9). 'Hanging-out'has beenidentified as an importantcomponent in thesocial lives of youngpeople, often simply taking the formof meetingother young people withoutadult supervision at homeor in a public space suchas a 'mallor a park'(Garner, 2002: vii). Conceptualizingsocial network sites in thisway enables traditional questions in youthstudies around identity and subcultural notionsof belonging to be framedin a contemporarycontext and appliedto a relatively new mediumof youthsociality. To returnto our earlierobservation, rather than being concernedwith fundamentallynew modes of sociality,the youngpeople thatare

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robarásand Bennett 309

engagingwith these sites on an everydaybasis are doingso in a highlyfluid manner, incorporatingthese technologies into their everyday practices. It is notthese sites that are shapingthe lives of theirusers, but rather quite the opposite. Thus, sites like MySpace andFacebook do notreconfigure social relationshipsor systemsof identityand belonging,but they do makethese dimensions of everydaylife highly visible, exposing and articulatingexisting social practices. Preliminarydata froma qualitativestudy being conductedon the Gold Coast has revealedsupport for the arguments outlined here, in additionto contributinga new per- spectiveto the post-subculturaldebate. The studyinvolved in-depth semi-structured interviewswith 32 youngpeople (11 males,21 females)aged 18 to 27, coupledwith observationand discourseanalysis of theparticipants' social networksite profiles. The interviewssought to make inquiriesinto the onlinesocial practicesof youngpeople, uncoveringhow their identities are constructedand subsequentlysituated within, across orin-between systems of belonging and whether those systems can be conceptualizedas subculturesor somethingcloser to a neo-tribalconfiguration of belonging.Themes includethe range and extentof participants'networks, their strategies for dealing with unsolicitedcontact and theirnegotiations with potentially awkward social situations suchas romanticbreak-ups, the rejection of friend requests, how to negotiate the division betweenprivate and public spheresof life and dealingwith inappropriate content. Findingsrelated to determiningfriendship and dealingwith unsolicited contact have beendiscussed elsewhere (Robards, 2010). Initialparticipants were recruited from undergraduate humanities courses at Griffith Universityon the Gold Coast, and subsequentinterviewees were recruitedthrough a processof selectivesnowballing to broadenthe participant pool. Whilesnowballing can potentiallynarrow a participantpool ratherthan diversifying it, in thisinstance a rela- tivelyselective approach was taken.Specifically, when inviting interviewees from the undergraduatepopulation to suggestother potential participants, only contacts without a universitybackground were pursued. However, despite this approach, only five partici- pantsdid not have university backgrounds. While this would appear to be a stronglimita- tionof the research, we wouldcontend that a universitybackground does not immediately correlatewith notions of privilege and class,especially on theGold Coast. The Gold Coast,both a regionand a cityin SouthEast Queenslandon themid-east coastof Australia, is perhapsbest known as a tourismdestination coupled with a recent - andstrong surge of local development in theorder of a 3.5 percentincrease in popula- tioneach yearsince the early1990s (KPMG and Universityof Queensland,in Wise, 2006: 177). As a relativelynew yet quickly developing city with a largelytransient popu- lationoriented towards construction and serviceindustries, the Gold Coast is itselfan interestingcontext for discussionsof privilege,class, neighbourhood,community, belonging,identity and traditionalcorrelations between social, culturaland economic capital.Within the context of this research, these issues become increasingly difficult to pin downand workinto a methodologicalapproach. However, due ethicalconcern has been givento providinga relativelyrepresentative sample of youngpeople fromthe Gold Coast froma varietyof backgroundsand situations.The anonymityof theseindi- vidualshas beenpreserved throughout the research, and in thisarticle interviewees have beenassigned aliases to maintainthe de-identification process.

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 310 Sociology45(2)

Youth engagement with social network sites on the Gold Coast

Fundamentalto theperformance of identity(regardless of whetheror notthis perfor- manceis conceptualizedas virtualand thusoften lesser in thereal/virtual dichotomy) is thenotion of belonging, which in youthstudies and broader sociological terminology is oftenanalysed through subcultural frameworks. As Baumanobserves, identity as a con- ceptwas 'bornout of the crisis of belonging' (2004: 20) andyet, simultaneously, identity is oftenexpressed in termsof belonging.However, as indicatedearlier, this study has begunto reveal that the ways in which young people describe their own sense of belonging is increasinglyfluid and broad.Rather than adhering to the strictboundaries of belongingimplied by subculturalframeworks, the identities being performed on social networksites (and subsequentlyreflected on by participants)would align more closely (althoughnot absolutely) with a neo-tribalreading of belonging.In essence,although invokingsubcultural terminologies as a meansof delineatingterms of culturalassocia- tionwith others, the everyday language and terms of reference used by the young people in thisstudy point to a seriesof lifestyle projects which are highly reflexive, individually derivedand actedout across a diverserange of sitesand spacesin boththe physical and theonline realm. In thissense, the findings of this study tend to bear out Bennett's (2004) observationthat, rather than offering a new domainfor the construction of 'subcultural' relationships,internet communication between young people oftentends to replicate whatis alreadyapparent in face-to-facerelationships. In thecase of thepresent study, neo-tribaltendencies already in evidenceat theface-to-face level are oftenaccentuated and givena greaterdegree of presence through participation in socialnetwork sites. All intervieweesconfirmed boyd and Ellison's (2007) observationthat social network sitessuch as MySpace and Facebook are used primarilyas social utilitiesto connect existingcontacts rather than to generatenew ones. However,several interviewees have indicatedthat social network sites can also be usedas a 'next-step'information gathering ' exerciseafter an initialoffline meeting. Alison (19) recalledthat ...if you meetsome- one at a partythey'll add youthen you might go on a dateor something ... butif you just saw themat a party,you mightnot take it further'.Other interviewees reported similar experiencesof meeting people at parties,nightclubs or othersocial eventsand conduct- ing the 'secondmeeting' through Facebook or MySpace.However, when Melissa (20) was askedto explainwhy she didn't keep information (such as hobbiesand interests) on ' herprofile up to date,she explained . . .it'snot important to me . . . meetme and ask me, don't see thatI'm a personon Facebook'. The same intervieweewent on to extolthe virtuesof social network sites, but emphasized their role as facilitatorsfor offline sociality.Thus, while social network sites are clearly central to thesocial livesof participants, theywere also quickto downplaythat centrality. Wheninitially given the opportunity to commenton specificinstances and practices ofidentity performance on siteprofiles, most interviewees were fairly evasive and vague. Despitethe open processof identityperformance, the actual reflexive description was unsurprisinglymore difficult to teaseout. To overcomethis difficulty, interviewees were askedto describewhat kind of story(or movie,as thisoften provided a moreimmediate response)might be writtenabout them if the only information available to theimagined

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robardsand Bennett 3 11 authorwas theirprofiles. Shannon (23) provideda particularlyimaginative response: 'It'd be abouturban exploration in an abandonedwarehouse which ends up becoming myhome which is made intoa loftwhich I hold ravesat.' Shannonextrapolated this scenariofrom the content on his MySpaceprofile, which included allusions to ravecul- tureand whathe termed'urban exploration'. Not all responseswere so specificor embeddedin what might be referredto as subculturalpractices. Naomi (19) imaginedthe filmbased on herFacebook profile would be about'a youngwoman moving away from home,going to a new country,travelling around, having lots of friends. . . just all the usual stuffnineteen year-olds do'. Whileeach responsewas differentand articulatedin varyingways, the crucial point here is thateach intervieweewas able to drawout a rela- tivelycohesive narrative from the information presented on their profiles, such as images, hobbies,status updates and otherinterests. The earlycritics of virtualidentity (see Turkle,1995, for a discussionon identitycrisis) argued that the 'reflexive questioning, ironyand . . . playfulprobing' inherent in onlineidentity construction would result in a situationwhere 'the centre fails to hold' (Gergen,in Turkle,1995: 257), withthe indi- vidualbecoming saturated in multiplicity tothe point of incoherence - a sentimentwhich persistsin some media reportsand populardiscourse surrounding the internettoday. Contraryto this discursive trend, the research reported here indicates the opposite. When askedto thinkreflexively about what constitutes their identity in orderto demonstrate someversion of thatself on a social networksite, interviewees demonstrated relatively structuredconcepts of self-identity.While these identities can oftenbe multiple,fluid andeclectic, they are also simultaneouslycoherent in thesecases. Theprofiles that constitute social network sites rely on whatare generally regarded as subculturalframes of reference (as demonstratedby Shannon'sexample above) to actas referentsin theprocess of performance: images (or otherinvocations) of bands, a listof favouritebooks or a profilepicture featuring the page's authorin herfavourite football jersey.2While these performances require some level of what Thornton refers to as 'subculturalcapital' (1996) to bothenact and decode, the overall identity these performances contributeto does notadhere to therigidity implied by subculturalcategorization. Grant,for example, a 20-year-oldmale studentliving on theGold Coast in his fourth yearof an engineeringdegree, saw his MySpaceprofile as 'a pictureof whatyour per- sonalityis like,and what you like'. He saw dancemusic as an importantpart of his profile and he recognizedthat it situatedhim as someonewho attendednightclubs that playeddance music. However, he also madea pointof separating himself from the practicesof illicit drug usage and smoking which he saw as inherentlyinvolved with his taste inmusic and the practice of going to night clubs. David, an 18-year-old male non-student livingon theGold Coastand working in thehospitality and retail industries, made simi- larconnections with his interest in dancemusic and the practice of attending night clubs. However,he wentfurther to implicatehis taste in musicin his self-narrative:'that music is mylife'. David also foregroundedhis sexualityas centralto his identity,seeing him- selfas 'a typicalgay 18-year-oldhaving fun on theCoast'. By deployingdance music as an undercurrentelement in theironline identity performances,both Grant and David reflexivelyobserved that their taste in musicimplied a subculturalconnection to otherpractices - namely,going to nightclubs (for both), drug usage(for Grant) and the gay community (for David). Theseinterviewees recognized the

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 312 Sociology45(2) implicitrigidity of conceptualizingthemselves in subculturalterms and subsequently mountedwhat we mighteffectively call a post-subculturalcritique of theirown online identityperformances. By rejectingsome associated practices (drug usage) andstrength- eningother, possibly tenuous associations (gay community)the interviewees were rec- ognizingthe expectedor impliedrigidity in theircommon practice and effectively resistingthat rigidity. This observationalso pointsto an oftenoverlooked aspect of Muggleton's(2000) readingof post-subculturalidentity. According to Muggleton, althoughpost-subcultural identities are mostreadily identified through the visual pick- and-mixassortment of stylesadopted by post-subculturalists,equally important are the identitydiscourses that young people create to explainsuch eclecticism. Such discourses also drawon elementsof perceived'subcultural' narratives - in the above case, club culture,drug use and gay identity- selectivelyadopting particular aspects of thesenar- rativesand leavingout other aspects to producean individualizednarrative of identity. However,the everyday operationalization of suchnarratives, across an arrayof cultural practices,is, by contrast,suggestive of an inherentlypost-subcultural, neo-tribal form of engagementwith different clusters of youthcultural practice as theseunfold across the Gold Coastregion. Whenasked to describewhat subculture is, all intervieweesdefined the concept sim- plyas a smallgroup within a parentculture and gave examplessuch as 'hardcorekids', 'skaters','footie boys' (Tim,18) and themore traditional 'punks' right through to more abstract,non-traditional categorizations such as 'gym-junkies'3and the 'club subculture' (Eric, 20). Each descriptionof a proposedsubculture included some preconceived notionsabout clothing, musical interests, attitudes (usually towards alcohol and drugs) and evenwhich groups the interviewee might get along with the most. However, these descriptionswere almost always reflexively positioned as awkward,ill-fitting general- izations.For example,no intervieweesidentified themselves as strictlybelonging to a singlesubculture, although they did statethat they recognized elements of subculture withintheir own self-narratives. However, there was a clearsense that these articulations of belongingwere positioned in-between what they described as subculturesor rather whatthey conceptualized as modelsof belonging,thus resisting alignment with pre- existinggroups of individuals.Tim (18), forinstance, described himself as 'a drifter' betweenhis friendship groups, which he characterizedaccording to culturaland sporting practices.Jamie (27) was easily able to name subculturessuch as 'goths', 'punks', 'surfers'and 'skaters',but when she was askedto describepractices and styles associated with these groupsshe was hesitantto extendher descriptionbeyond the obvious assumptionthat skaters went skating and surfers went surfing. Further, Jamie was unable to nameany people in hernetwork of Facebookfriends that adhered neatly with any of thesubcultural groupings she described.Eric (20) was morearticulate: '...while I may belongto that[subculture], I wouldn't say I onlybelong to that.I thinkI'm partof other ones as well.And I wouldn'tsay I'm totallyinvolved in them.' These kinds of reflexivelyconstructed accounts of identityare consistentwith Muggleton'snotion of liminalsubcultures in which'groups have begun to breakout of thevery boundaries through which they are defined'(2000: 75). Social networksites requireindividuals to piece togetherwhat they constitute as self-identity,and it is to be expectedthat this reflexive process will intensify the need for young people to developa

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robarásand Bennett 3 13 coherentsense of self (or not,by way of resistance)in orderto participatein digital culture.While Muggleton examines eclecticism in termsof fashionand appearance,we would assertthat the rigidityand impliedcohesiveness of the subculturalmodel is problematizedby a broaderkind of eclecticism,manifest in all culturalconfigurations: not only fashionbut also food, music, sports,travel, films, literature and so on, encompassingany form of cultural practice. Whereas Muggleton argues for the category of 'crossovercounterculture' or liminalsubculture reminiscent of Gottschalk's'freak style'that is 'unwillingto embraceany recognizable (sub)cultural style,' (Gottschalk, in Muggleton,2000: 77) we wouldextend this subcultural resistance, having observed it in thedata from this study, and alignit with a neo-tribalreading of belonging. Rather than organizingtheir system(s) of belonging around a particulartaste or style(exemplified by thegoths in Hodkinson'swork) the participants in thisstudy from a generalsample of youngpeople on theGold Coast,Australia, appear to conceptualizetheir own senseof belongingin a muchmore multiplicitous (yet, interestingly, simultaneously persistent), inter-connected,fluid and individual-centredway. It is thissense of belongingthat we alignloosely with Maffesoli's concept of the neo-tribe. This partialsense of belonging,or belongingto multiplecategories is a clear demonstrationof a post-subculturaltrend emerging in the reflexiveconstruction of identityamongst young people. Rather than belonging exclusively to a subsectionof a parentculture and beingaware of how (and why)that respective group deviates from generalculture, subculture has becomea discursiveconstruct, more akin to a paletteof tastesthat the individualcan draw from,modify and remixin achievinga reflexive understandingof self.In thissense, what our study ultimately reveals are a seriesof etic constructionsof 'subculture'operationalized by youngpeople on the Gold Coast to describea diverseseries of lifestylepractices and tastesthat are, conceptually speaking, farmore closely aligned with current sociological interpretations and applicationsof neo-tribalismthan with subcultural theory. However, while we wouldargue that the neo- tribemodel proposed by Maffesoli (1996) and advancedby Bennett(1999, 2000) offers a more conceptuallycongruent alternative to the subculturalframework, there are instancesin whichthis model, as it stands,is also insufficientto describethe sociality occurringon socialnetwork sites.

Rethinking neo-tribes Throughoutthis article, it has beensuggested that the practices of young people on social networksites adhere more closely to thepractices and conventionsassociated with post- subculturalforms of identificationthan with traditional subcultural models. That said, we also wishto arguethat the distinctive ways in whichthe internet is used by young people,and thedistinction made herebetween 'networking' (forming new social relationships)and 'networks'(typified by MySpace and Facebookas sitesfor the articula- tionand facilitation of existing social relationships) suggests a needfor some refinement of Maffesoli'soriginal neo-tribe model. The practiceof onlinenetworking (in themore traditionalsense) adheres quite neatly with Maffesoli's original deployment of neo-tribe as bespeakingan inherentlyfragile, ephemeral and essentiallyfluid form of social engagement.However, the formation of morestable networks (and thearticulation of

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 314 Sociology45(2) theseoffline networks in an onlinespace) suggestsan emergenceof morepermanent groupings,albeit ones thatare facilitatedand managedby a technologicalmedium that transcendsconventional understandings of collectivesocial activity.Many participants, forinstance, report 'de-briefing' on Facebookafter a weekendof partying and socializ- ing,by recountingstories and commentingon imagesfrom the weekend's events. It is ourcontention that a newprocess of tribalizationis occurringhere - one notenvisaged by Maffesoli.On thebasis of ourfindings, there would appear to be a criticalproblem withMaffesoli's theorization of neo-tribe,notably in its unerringconviction that neo- tribalassociations result only in temporal bondings characterized by short-lived bursts of sociality.Nowhere in Maffesoli'sinterpretation is there scope forthe possibility of self- selectingneo-tribal groupings producing their own sense of permanence based around an affectivitygrounded in mutualunderstandings - aesthetic, political, or otherwise.This, however,is preciselywhat our findingswould tend to suggest.While the sensibilities manifestedby our interviewees exhibit neo-tribal qualities, the resulting forms of social- itycannot in everyinstance be read as a seriesof fleetingand temporalassociations. Arguablythen, Maffesoli's concept of neo-tribesand associatedinterpretation of the neo-tribalcondition requires some revision. Thus, rather than being held to describean entiresocio-cultural milieu in a constantstate of flux, perhaps neo-tribalism is best char- acterizedas a processof temporalwandering whereby like-minded individuals eventu- allyfind each other. Traversing a highly fragmented late modern social terrain, individuals seek each otherout and createmore permanent, albeit less rigid,forms of association groundedin a reflexiveprocess of self-selection based around perceived commonality in termsof taste,aesthetics, outlook, and othercultural attributes referred to by Chaney (1996) as lifestyles.Due tothe cultural fragmentation associated with late modernity, the everydayterrains that individuals must traverse in their search for like-minded others are increasinglyvast and multi-layered.Thus, temporary engagement with a varietyof col- lectivitiesbecomes an increasinglynecessary step in seekingout those individuals and collectivespaces (virtual and physical) with whom and within which one feels'at home'. To putthis in thecontext of thecurrent article, while there are social spaces on the internetthat align much more readily with the ephemeraland impermanentnature of Maffesoli'soriginal conceptualization of the neo-tribe, social network sites, or rather the social ties articulatedon thesesites, appear to operatevery differently. Our findings (consistentwith other research in thefield, notably charted by boydand Ellison's2007 article)indicate that social network sites are articulations of collectivity that appear to be crystalizingover timé.Although not generallyspaces fornetworking in a traditional sense,they are equallytribal in thatthey are notnecessarily bounded by class,locality and so on. Nevertheless,they embody a greatersense of coherencethan forms of engagementbased aroundnetworking and may,in particularcases, solidifyinto semi- permanentgroupings.

Conclusion Thisarticle has examinedthe subculture/post-subculture debate in thecontext of young people'suse of social networksites. The aim of thearticle - andbroader research from whichthe articleis drawn- is to ascertainthe extentto whichthe formsof social

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robarásand Bennett 3 15

connectionand expressionsof onlinesociality displayed by social networksite users conformwith the basic characteristicsof subcultureor whetherthey tend more towards thequalities associated by Maffesoli with neo-tribes. Our current data suggest that social networksite users exhibit patterns of onlinebehaviour that adhere more with qualities associatedwith neo-tribes than with subcultures. At thesame time,however, the varia- tionsin fixityof social relationships formed via socialnetwork sites suggest the need for a criticalrevision of Maffesoli's original model of neo-tribes in orderto accountfor the possibilityof more concrete and stablerelationships, generated on socialnetwork sites. The individual-centredsystems of social connectivityoccurring on social network sitesare just one instanceof how young people are required to negotiatean increasingly complexterrain of identitythat requires coherent, reflexively constructed performances of self.While the research described here is beginningto grapplewith these issues and filterthe everyday online social practices of young people into sociological frameworks, thedynamic and fluid nature of this terrain and the manifestations ofthese issues require ongoinginvestigation and revision.

Acknowledgements Wewould like to thank the participants inthis research for their valuable time and insights.

Notes 1 Footballjersey as inAustralian National Rugby League (NRL). 2 Usuallymen who spend large amounts of time exercising and weight-lifting ata gymnasium.

References AdornoT andHorkheimer M (1969) The Dialectic of Enlightenment. London: Allen Lane. ArlingtonM (2008) Facebook Isn ì a SocialNetwork. And Stop Trying toMake New Friends There. Techcrunch.com.Available at: http://techcrunch.eom/2008/09/15/facebook-isnt-a-social-network- and-dont-try-to-make-new-friends-there/ BarthesR (1977)The third meaning. In: Heath S (ed.)Image , Music, Text. London: Fontana. BassettC (1997)Virtually gendered: Life in an onlineworld. In: Gelder K andThornton S (eds) TheSubcultures Reader. London: Routledge. BaumanZ (1996)From pilgrim to tourist - or a shorthistory of identity. In: Hall S andDu GayP (eds)Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage. BaumanZ (2004)Identity. Cambridge: Polity. BeckerHS (1963)Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press. BennettA (1999) Subcultures orneo-tribes? Rethinking the relationship between youth, style and musicaltaste. Sociology 33(3): 599-617. BennettA (2000 ) PopularMusic and Youth Culture: Music, Identity and Place. London: Macmillan. BennettA (2004)Virtual subculture? Youth, identity and the internet. In: BennettA andKahn- HarrisK (eds) AfterSubculture: Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture. Basingstoke: Palgrave. BennettA (2005) Culture and Everyday Life. London: Sage. BowkerGC (2007)The past and the internet. In: Karaganis J(ed.) Structures ofParticipation in DigitalCulture. Columbia, OH: ColumbiaUniversity Press. boydd (2007a)Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage sociallife. In: BuckinghamD (ed.) Youth,Identity, and Digital Media. Chicago: MacArthur FoundationSeries on Digital Learning.

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 3 16 Sociology45(2)

boydd (2007b)None of this is real:Identity and participation inFriendster. In:Karaganis J(ed.) StructuresofParticipation inDigital Culture. Columbia, OH: ColumbiaUniversity Press. boydd andEllison N (2007)Social network sites: Definition, history and scholarship. Journal of Computer-MediatedCommunication 13(1). Available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/voll3/ issue1/boyd.ellison.html BrakeM (1985) ComparativeYouth Culture : The Sociologyof YouthCultures and Youth SubculturesinAmerica , Britain and Canada. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. ChaneyD (1996)Lifestyles. London: Routledge. ChaneyD (2004)Fragmented culture and subcultures. In:Bennett A and Kahn-Harris K (eds) After Subculture:Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture. Basingstoke: Palgrave. CummingsJ(2006) It's more than a t-shirt:Neo-tribal sociality and linking images at Australian indiemusic festivals. Perfect Beat 8(1): 65-84. Facebook(2010) FacebookPress Room.Available at: http://www.facebook.com/press/info. php?statistics GarnerR (2002)Hanging Out : Community-basedAfter-school Programs for Children. Westport, CT: Bergin& Garvey. Hall S andJefferson T (1976) (eds) Resistance through Rituals: Youth Subcultures inPost-war Britain.London: Hutchinson. HealyD (1997)Cyberspace and place: The internet as middle landscape on the electronic frontier. In:Porter D (ed.)Internet Culture. London: Routledge. HebdigeD (1979)Subculture : The Meaning of Style. London: Routledge. HitwiseAustralia (2008) Top Websites and Search Engine Analysis Report. Available at: http:// www.hitwise.com/au/datacentre/main/dashboard-1706.html HitwiseAustralia (2009) TopWebsites and Search Engine Analysis Report. Available at: http:// www.hitwise.com/au/datacentre/main/dashboard-1706.html HitwiseAustralia (2010) Top Websites and Search Engine Analysis Report. Available at: http:// www.hitwise.com/au/datacentre/main/dashboard-1706.html HodkinsonP (2002) Communicatinggoth: Online media. In: GelderK (ed.) TheSubcultures Reader.London: Routledge. HodkinsonP (2003) 'Net.goth': Internet communication and (sub)culturalboundaries. In: MuggletonD and Weinzierl R (eds) The Post-subcultures Reader. Oxford: Berg. HodkinsonP (2004) The Goth scene and (sub)cultural substance. In: Bennett A and Kahn-Harris K (zás)After Subculture: Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture. Basingstoke: Palgrave. HodkinsonP and Lincoln S (2008)Online journals as virtualbedrooms? Young people, identity andpersonal space. Nordic Journal of Youth Research 16(1): 27-46. JoinsonA (2008) 'Lookingať, 'lookingup' or 'keepingup with'people? Motives and uses of Facebook.Computer-Human-Interaction Conference Proceedings'. 1027-36. JonesS, MillermaierS, Goya-Martinez M and Schuler J(2008) Whose space is MySpace?A con- tentanalysis of MySpace profiles. First Monday 13(9). Available at: http://www.uic.edu/htbin/ cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2202/2024 KahnR andKellner D (2003)Internet subcultures and oppositional politics. In: Muggleton D and WeinzierlR (eds) The Post-subcultures Reader. Oxford: Berg. Lévi-StraussC (1966) The Savage Mind. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson. LuckmanS (2003)Going bush and finding one's 'tribe': Raving, doof and the Australian landscape.Continuum: A Journal of Media and Cultural Studies 17(3): 318-32. MacDonaldD (1953)A theoryof mass culture. In: Rosenberg B and White D (eds)Mass Culture: ThePopular Arts in America. Glencoe, IL: TheFree Press. McLuhanM (1962)The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. Toronto: University ofToronto Press.

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Robarásand Bennett 3 17

MafřesoliM (1996)The Time of the Tribes: The Decline of Individualism inMass Society , trans. SmithD. London:Sage. MertonRK (1957)Social Theory and Social Structure. London: Collier-Macmillan. MilesS (2000)Youth lifestyles ina changingworld. Buckingham, UK: OpenUniversity Press. MuggletonD (2000) Inside Subculture : The Postmodern Meaning of Style. Oxford: Berg. PapacharissiZ (2009) The virtualgeographies of socialnetworks: A comparativeanalysis of Facebook,Linkedln and ASmallWorld. New Media & Society11(2): 199-220. PearsonE (2009)All the World Wide Web's a stage:The performance ofidentity inonline social networks.First Monday 14(3). Availableat: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/ index.php/fm/article/view/2162/2 127#p6 PeetersH (2008)The networked self: Autofiction onMySpace. Image & Narrative8(2). RedheadS (1990) TheEnd-of-the-Century Party: Youthand Pop Towards2000. Manchester: ManchesterUniversity Press. RobardsB (2010)Randoms in my bedroom: Negotiating privacy and unsolicited contact on social networksites. PRism 7(3). Available at: http://www.prismjournal.org/fileadmin/Social_media/ Robards.pdf RobertsK, PollockG, TholenJ and Tarkhnishvili L (2009) Youth leisure careers during post- communisttransitions inthe South Caucasus. Leisure Studies 28(3): 261-77. ShildrickT and MacDonald R (2006)In defenceof subculture: Young people, leisure and social divisions.Journal of Youth Studies 9(2): 125^0. St JohnG (2003) Post-ravetechnotribalism andthe carnival of protest. In: MuggletonD and WeinzierlR (eds) The Post-subcultures Reader. Oxford: Berg. ThorntonS (1996) ClubCultures : Music, Media and SubculturalCapital. London: Wesleyan UniversityPress. TurkleS (1995)Life on the Screen: Identity inthe Age of the Internet. New York: Touchstone. WiseP (2006)Australia's Gold Coast: A cityproducing itself. In: Linder C (ed.) UrbanSpace and Cityscapes:Perspectives from Modern and Contemporary Culture. London: Routledge.

BradyRobards is an Associate Lecturerand PhD Candidatewithin the School of Humanitiesat Griffith University on theGold Coastand an affiliateof the Griffith Centre forCultural Research. Brady's research explores how young people use onlinesocial to constructa reflexive sense of identity. The projectis also concernedwith how that sense of selfis positionedwithin, across or in-betweensystems of belongingand how these systemsof belonging (and theway scholarsconceptualise them) are changing.Brady is a memberof boththe Australian Sociological Association (TASA) and the Cultural StudiesAssociation of Australasia (CSAA).

AndyBennett is Professorof CulturalSociology and Directorof theGriffith Centre for CulturalResearch in Queensland,Australia. He has authoredand edited numerous books includingPopular Music and YouthCulture , Cultures of Popular Music , Remembering Woodstock, After Subculture and Music Scenes.He is a FacultyAssociate of theCenter forCultural Sociology, Yale University,and an Associateof PopuLUs, the Centre for the Studyof the World's Popular Musics at Leeds University.He is also Editorin Chieffor theJournal of Sociology.

Datesubmitted November 2009 Dateaccepted July 2010

This content downloaded from 128.195.64.2 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:23:15 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions