Asking whether or not online community is real community is really not even a good question, or the right question in my opinion, but it’s one that everyone seems to be asking. Lots of people have already answered that question but many are continuing to wrestle with it.
I think online community is real community, and just by the fact that we are having that conversation, or asking that question tells me it does exist, otherwise it would be a moot point.
Now sure, we could go on from there and talk about what kind of community it is I suppose, but I believe it’s community.
This conversation recently was stirred up by Shane Hipps interview at National Pastor’s Convention where he says virtual community is virtual, but not community. Anne Jackson says it’s connection, not community. And Scot McKnight says it isn’t that simple to answer.
Tell us what you think: Is Online Community, Real Community? Why? Why Not?
Of course it is real community. Just ask anyone who uses Facebook, MySpace, AIM, SKYPE or remembers the old AOL Chat rooms. It IS community. It just doesn’t fit our “Christian” traditions of what community is. Doesn’t make it any less real.
Some day the church will wake up to this and stop fighting it. Gosh, we can be so stubborn sometimes.
I will admit that there is a form of online community but I would say it is a limited community. If I look at my interactions with you Rhett, they are very limited and really I have a snapshot of you and you have a snapshot of me. If we actually sat down, face to face, we would probably hear each others hearts more and learn a ton more from each other than we do online.
As I have stated before, online communities allow you to say things in very direct ways that you normally wouldn’t say if you were sitting face to face with someone (aka. If I have to think twice about tweeting a message, I don’t tweet it), we also can create a persona of ourselves that isn’t real, hence why cybersex and online sex chatrooms have seen such large increases—even in the church—because you can be something that you defintely are not in the real world.
The ultra example of limited community would be World of Warcraft or Second-life communities, which create almost out of body experiences based on imagination and desire to be something in an imaginary world vs. what you are unhappy with in real life.
If the Ku Klux Klan could be a limited community within the overall larger community, then I don’t see why the online world would be any different, I just feel it can create dangerous limitations if accountability structures are not established.
My two cents:
http://www.tonystewardblog.com/2009/03/03/is-online-community-real/
If online community is “real,” meaning that something happens when people interact online, maybe we should start asking if online community is “deep” or “sufficient.”
To be honest, I haven’t plumbed the depths of online community enough to answer that question. My guess, though, is that technology is better suited to supplement relationship than comprise it. In my limited experience, the best relationships in my life have an incarnational, in-person dimension that I wouldn’t trade for anything.
To Paraphrase Bubba Gump “Community is as community does”. I don’t know exactly what that means but I’ve wanted to use that for some time and now seems as good as any.
Community will happen wherever community can happen. It’s just like those tiny clumps of grass that you see growing on the side of a rock on a huge cliff. There was some dirt, a seed fell, it rained, there was some sun and by golly some grass grew.
That’s how community happens . . . period.
It might be acres of grass in Kansas or a rock on a cliff in Big Bend – the quantity might be different but it’s still community. There may even be a difference in the quality if you are comparing wheat grown under optimum conditions to a tiny spot of soil and a little clump of grass – but that doesn’t diminish the validity of either.
To say that community can’t happen online or that it isn’t real is like those who claimed that since man wasn’t meant to travel faster than 35 mph or so on a horse that going any faster on a train would kill him.
There are people who I have more community with online than I do with the folks I come to work with every day. I don’t elevate one form over the other – I just take them as they are, for what they are worth, for their positives and negatives and don’t try to make one form of community into something that it isn’t.
I believe Shane Hipps, who I respect a great deal (though he acts like Marshall McLuhan was just discovered and for those of us who cut our teeth on him back in the 70′s . . . well, it makes us chuckle) elaborated more about his short interview from NPC here http://tinyurl.com/c4kgtb and I don’t think we are that far apart on answering the question.
I take it as it is, and value it for what it is, which is another expression of community . . . and we all agree that face to face is the ideal . . . except when you aren’t face to face
I’m not sure I like the term “online community”. I am connected to 200 some odd friends on facebook and more than that on twitter. Do I have real community with all of them, are they my online community? NO – I’m sure we all have facebook friends from our high school years that we aren’t any more connected to now then we were way back in the day. But, for the ones that I do truly engage with, our interactions online are just as authentic and real as any other relationship whether we have ever met face to face or not. My community, the people I choose to be truly authentic with, is both online and in person.
That was quite a ridiculous post I have to say… the question is real because it is being asked?!! Yeah obviously it is a real question and obviously there is a community of people online. It functions differently than a community in a neighborhood or school or church. You can find advice meet new people share experiences, photos, videos and music. So yes the internet has made way for a new type of communication and therefore new communities were formed online where people have similar interests. So all in all I think this discussion is just useless over thought of a relatively simple concept.
Art,
I agree…..and yes, we are very stubborn aren’t we
Ben,
I agree that accountability is often lacking in online, but sometimes I think that if a person is accountable in person, they will want/desire to be accountable online. Those who don’t want accountability online, often don’t want it in person either. Make sense? Good questions….
Tony,
Awesome post you wrote…I think you are leading the conversation in this area, especially among churches, etc. Keep it up.
Scott,
Good point…about the question..is it deep and sufficient. I would say that it can be very deep, and also shallow, just like real life. I love being with people in person…and I have tried to use technology as a means to make that happen, to be the catalyst for that incarnational, in person, chat over a cup of coffee or something. Technology has definitely enhanced that.
Bill,
“Community is as community does” I could paste your whole comment…very well put. And you are right…McLuhan has been around for a while, and is not new. But obviously a powerful voice still…but like you said, many cut their teeth on him in the 70′s, and many of us are just discovering him I suppose…but he’s not some secret for sure. I agree with Shane as well on many points…he brings up good stuff, but disagree with him on many others also. He’s a good guy, and a former classmate of mine at Fuller Seminary. And speaking on face to face community, I still need to get coffee with you…how does April look?
Baker,
Maybe there is a better term out there, but I’m not sure of what that is yet. I really like this last line, “My community, the people I choose to be truly authentic with, is both online and in person.” Agree.
Scott,
“So all in all I think this discussion is just useless over thought of a relatively simple concept.” I don’t agree. Simple, maybe in that yeah, we are obviously all gathering online, so there is obviously community. But I don’t think we can over think it yet, or ask enough questions yet as many questions are still being asked of how, what does a community look like online? How is it best cultivated? Engaged? Etc.
Thanks for the comments….
Rhett
There’s a really good book out there called The Search to Belong by Joe Myers. To make a long story short, he identifies four different kinds of “space” that people need to have relationships in for good social health. (Public, social, personal and intimate)
I think “online community” is what he describes as Public or Social space.
In Public space you’re part of something bigger than yourself, and while you recognize other people there you don’t really know them. Public relationships are people rooting for the same team at a baseball game, or the familiar head nod at the guy who owns the gas station closest to your house.
In Social space you share “snapshots” of who you are in order to help you define yourself, and to help you choose whom (in anyone) you want to become better friends with.
They’re not “deep” or “personal” relationships, but they’re necessary and healthy and available for the taking in “online communities.”
I think the Internet is good at fostering certain kinds of communities, one of which is communities with a level of anonymity. Though anonymity can be dangerous, it can sometimes be helpful as we see in Alcoholics Anonymous or the counseling office.
At my job we recently put together a video of a former student who is shepherding just such a community for teens http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/04/internet-anonymity-like-loin-cloths-and-aa-can-be-a-means-of-grace/.