Eben uses etiquette a lot as an example of a form of strong social control, so I think I might write my second paper on Facebook etiquette or social media etiquette or even for texting. Do you guys have any examples of rules of etiquette that you've noticed? Like it is never bad etiquette to untag photos (it's your image), but it is bad etiquette to untag and then retag (indecisive and annoying for the person who posts). Any examples of people violating etiquettes, maybe due to age and unfamiliarity (like your parents)? Or gender differences in etiquette rules (girls are allowed to text "kk" but apparently I'm not).

Thanks,

-Alex

-- AlexWang - 19 Apr 2012

Hey,

I think using a lot of abbreviations while texting tends to be a sign of age. I've heard a lot of people (myself included) jokingly lament about having to decipher text messages sent by people of their parent's generation. I think this could lead to some interesting thoughts about how new technology/new types of communication and the accompanying etiquette create a wider gap between people of different ages.

Also I think texting-as-a-form-of-communication exacerbates or perhaps highlights stratification within our society. A lot of my friends from college/law school treat texting like free pizza lunches - it's unlimited and will always be available - whereas some of my poorer friends from home have limited texting plans and can't communicate via text as much, which means they sometimes get left out of plans and/or group texts/jokes. It's something basic, but I definitely see this new form of communication widening the stratification spectrum.

-- SkylarPolansky - 18 Apr 2012

Thanks Skylar,

I really like your abbreevs examp and the idea that some social norms further alienate the practitioners and those within the community from outsiders. Presumably, abreeving starting in instant messaging and texting to save time typing because it's not as efficient as speaking. What is interesting is that abbreeving became a part of speech, first with things like "lol" and "wtf" but has developed a unique existence just in the spoken realm. Ppl now speak abbreviated words that are near impossible to write (like "deece" for decent, "yoosh/youge?" for usually). I think this is a good example of how quickly social norms develop so that they are no longer connected to their starting points. Whether or not abbreeving is a form of etiquette, however, I'm not sure. I'm not sure what abbreeving says about a person and what not doing it says. Is it a shared language distinguishing insiders from outsiders or does it also police insiders and for what reason (apart from the stigma of being an outsider)?

Your point on the cost of texting is also very interesting. But, presumably, if ppl without text plans have access to internet and can chat, they will not be completely restricted from the text-based social/internet culture and its shared language. Their inability to text will only restrict them from one way of communicating, but not the language as a whole.

Alex, I think this is a really good starting point. There definitely are powerful and agreed-upon codes of conduct in the realms of social media and text messaging. These are undoubtedly hugely powerful sources of social control. However, I think it may also be interesting for you to look at social media's relative ability over us compared to traditional human manners and interaction.

I often wish I lived in an earlier era, free from the onus of technology. Much to my chagrin, I think that social media and text messaging have become more able to control our behavior than older forms of social control, namely face-to-face contact. For example, there have been many times in my life that someone "friends" me on Facebook, and yet, when I say hello in the hallways at school or at a party, they pretend like they do not know me. Of course, they very well may not know me, but just acted according the substantial social norms of Facebook, making it ok to initiate a "friendship" with someone you don't know. It's not that this act is in itself anything bad, but I would hope the social force of in-person etiquette would trump online manners. Instead, I fear we are in a time in which online manners have become a social force superseding regular manners.

Another example of this is when you are with a group of people and everyone is looking at their phones. (I regret to say that I can be guilty of this.)

Hope this helps!

-- AbbyCoster - 19 Apr 2012

This is an interesting topic. It made me think about a couple of examples of text/Facebook etiquette from my own life.

First, it's interesting how specific cultural norms are also incorporated into these modes of communication. Amongst my friends in the UK, when we text each other, it's customary to put an "x" at the end for "kiss." One "x" is for acquaintances; several "xxx" for good friends. It's so customary that it almost reads as cold or impolite not to do it, and at times when I've forgotten, I've felt self-conscious. It's interesting to think about how I learned that without being told, and how I now unconsciously shift between different texting styles depending on whom I'm speaking with. Neither conveys my meaning more or less, but doing the ritual "correctly", depending on the social context, somehow feels important and necessary which, perhaps, lends some validity to the idea of etiquette as social control..

Another example I've also been thinking about recently is how much etiquette informs our use of social media and the degree to which we feel we can shape that experience on our own terms. I'm very liberal about adding and allowing myself to be added to other people's networks on Facebook when I enter a new environment. But over time, when situations arise wherein I'm connected to people via Facebook who I don't speak to, engage with, or even exchange "hello"s with when we pass each other in the halls either at school or in the workplace, I reserve the right to delete people from my list, and I frequently do mass Facebook culls. This habit has made for some interesting exchanges- I've gotten angry emails from acquaintances I haven't spoken to in years whom, for whatever reason, literally noticed what I had done the very next day and felt insulted. There is a very strong sense that it is bad manners or even mean-spirited to freely and frequently renegotiate the boundaries of this social space which I find bewildering, because we certainly feel like we have the right to renegotiate our off-line social spheres. Online etiquette of this form strikes me as particularly problematic because it intersects with our ideas about privacy, and what behaviors are OK or not OK to engage in when trying to protect it. It makes me wonder if perhaps we're being conditioned to see relinquishing a degree of privacy as necessary to maintaining a certain level of decorum.

Finally, on the other hand, it's also in these spaces where you can see social etiquette collapse a bit, and give way to something a little more illuminating. We've all experienced someone writing something topical on our Facebook "walls" which quickly leads to an ongoing conversation or "debate." Frequently these conversations breakdown somewhat because there isn't the same kind of very clearly defined and easy to convey social signaling you get in day-to-day social interactions, nor is there a rigid framework in place defining the limits of the discussion and who can participate. So, what you're left with are different meanings and normative understandings piled on top of each other and co-existing in uneasy tension which I think can be valuable in and of itself, though frustrating for the person trying to convey a precise message funneled through a mode of etiquette that the group, as a whole, has subscribed to and agrees upon.

-- RumbidzaiMaweni - 19 Apr 2012

You can't forget about being included on a mass text or email where reply-all is used to your annoyance (and cost) for days, with no way to opt out. I always thought there were some flagrant cc/to line abusers at the office. Either over-including on the cc line, or putting you in the in to line when you don't need to act. -- AlexKonik - 19 Apr 2012