Networking psychology

Ever since the Internet made its debut, there have been risks associated with surfing the Web. Society has become wary of Nigerian princes and sex predators, and viruses and spam no longer refer exclusively to illnesses and canned meat.

It should come as no surprise, then, that when social networking site Facebook launched six years ago, people were concerned about what social ills it would propagate. As it became more ubiquitous, the concerns grew.

Ted Striphas, an assistant professor in the Department of Communication and Culture, thinks some of that worry is misplaced.

“Facebook allows more access into people’s daily lives, to be sure,” he said. “What’s important not to lose sight of, however, is the fact that virtually every new technology — from the telephone to radio, television and beyond — has raised similar concerns. In many respects, the recent worries over Facebook are little more than instances of a forgotten history repeating itself.”

Indeed, there is remarkably little concrete evidence that Facebook is any riskier than chat rooms or e-mail when it comes to sex predation, online scams or computer viruses. Of course, that doesn’t mean the risks don’t exist, but the same rules apply to Facebook that apply all over the Internet. If you’re suspicious that something is illegal, it probably is.

Striphas agreed that protection from online scams rests in the hands of the people being scammed.

“Sure, crime happens, or can happen, on Facebook. I understand that there are “quizzes,” for example, that get you to disclose personal information that might then be used to hack your accounts online,” he said. “I doubt much can be done to stop this on the Facebook side of things.”

An argument can also be made that Facebook doesn’t stay on the Web. It follows people into their daily lives and contributes to psychological diseases like obsessive compulsive disorder and attention deficit disorder. Striphas concedes  this might be true but contends that Facebook is far from being the sole factor in such disorders, or even a very important one.

“The idea that Facebook is singularly responsible for disorders such as ADD and OCD is absurd. Is it a contributing factor? Perhaps, but what’s more important to recognize is the broader context of these disorders, which cannot be reduced to the influence of Facebook or digital media more generally,” he said. “There are numerous sociological, psychological and perhaps even environmental factors that also contribute to ADD and OCD, and so to scapegoat Facebook seems to me to miss the point.”   

Ultimately, and perhaps unfortunately, anecdotal evidence dominates the arguments against Facebook. A student’s grade-point average falls, so he cites Facebook addiction as the cause. A woman is fired when her boss sees compromising photographs of her, so she blames Facebook for making them so accessible. A young man has OCD-like symptoms and can’t stop checking his Facebook, but he points to its addictive nature as the reason.

As online social networking becomes more and more accessible, the potential for risk grows exponentially. Striphas would like to see “some type of digital information education that could take place in schools, perhaps at the level of junior high or earlier.
“We fail the citizenry to the extent that we do not prepare them to navigate what will only be an increasing life online.”