User:Jdegasperin

Briefly
I am a fourth year student at the University of Toronto where I study English and Book and Media Studies.

I am a Nerdfighter and a Whovian who likes post-it notes, tea, and listening to Time Lord rock at obscenely loud volumes. I believe that everyone should read the written word at least once a day and smile whenever possible. Also, penguins are cool.

Social Cohesion
Social cohesion is a term used most commonly in social policy, sociology and political science to describe the bonds that bring people together in society. The Oxford English Dictionary defines cohesion as “cleaving or sticking together” and is first recorded as being used in philosophical treatises by both John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. Since its origin, the term cohesion is used most often in conjunction with branches of study that focus on how people interact. Social cohesion in the current day has become a contested and debated topic as technology has fundamentally changed the way in which people interact and communities define themselves.

Background
In modern communities, there are two distinct mechanisms of social cohesion, the mass media and the internet. These two methods of communication are often seen as contradictory, and in many debates are presented in a black and white way. There are distinct attitudes that surround debates on which better serves the cohesion of modern society. In her book Virtual Communities, Felicia Wu Song outlines these attitudes, describing the tension as "one that consistently pits face-to-face community against virtual community, creating a stark -- and misleading -- dichotomy between the technology and the real". The dichotomy that Song refers to is based on how people view community; the two examples she gives, that of a community that exists entirely online, centered on a website and that of a community that exists in a specific locality. While seemingly different, the ways these two types of communities interact and are brought together in a type of ordered cohesion are very similar. Even though the two sides of the debate state their cases based on differences, there are many similarities that make both mass media and the internet viable mechanisms of social cohesion. Both mass media and the internet are tools that facilitate communication, which is a fundamental aspect of widespread social cohesion.

Until recent years, geography and place were the main mechanism of social cohesion; communities existed in a certain place and brought together by the common bond of their experiences in that place. These localized communities were best served by the mass media, which allowed for the sharing of news and events among a group of people who lived in the same area. Mass media has a localized scope, it focuses on the geographic community. However, since the rise of the internet in the latter part of the twentieth century, the idea of what makes a community has been distorted to include communities that exist entirely on the internet. This new notion of community causes the mass media to work harder to define itself as a mechanism of social cohesion, which is accomplishes by providing content that defines a community in opposition to another community. In an article for 'Medical Hypotheses', Editor in Chief Bruce G. Charlton recognizes this function of mass media and notes that "the paradox is that this cohesive function is sustained in a context of frequently divisive media content". With the world being increasingly globalized and connected, mass media needs to define itself as something other than that which connects people with the world around them. What Charlton proposes is that mass media brings people by showing them how different they are from the rest of the world; mass media in the twenty first century is a mechanism of social cohesion for particular communities, not the entire world.

Without geographical boundaries, social cohesion becomes more difficult to define; the community no longer exists solely with the limit of a town or a country or even centered around a similar culture or tradition. A modern definition of community has expanded to include the entire world. In a world where everyone is connected, social cohesion becomes about "networks, and the Net is the network to end all networks", as academic Robert Putnam describes it. The internet is a single thread that allows the world to engage in a global conversation about current events; it facilitates and moderates numerous communities and allows them to thrive, even though the members live in different countries.

In his book Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society, James Carey states that "communication is a symbolic process whereby reality is produced, maintained, repaired and transformed". With this idea established, it is fair to say that in order for a community to exist there needs to be communication between the members. Both mass media and the internet are tools that facilitate communication, which is a fundamental aspect of widespread social cohesion; therefore, the debates that circle around these two aspects of culture and community are not founded on which is 'better' as they both perform the tasks of initiating interaction and disseminating ideas. Both mass media and the internet provide cohesion for society, whether it is a traditional one or a modern invention, however, they have different approaches in how they provide this cohesion.

Social Cohesion and Mass Media
The function of mass media has changed drastically over the decades; Charlton points out that "in traditional societies the mass media essentially functioned as an instrument of ideological control...this was possible because the mass media faced little or no competition". This lack of competition led to a one sided conversation where the masses of society were told what to believe by the institutions that were in power. As we move into the modern era the function of mass media shifts and instead of being an instrument of control it becomes an instrument of social cohesion. In modern society, the competition between different media outlets demands greater audience participation. This dichotomy is the essential core of mass media; the more choices that people have, the more likely they are to come together in dialogue with each other and form a social bond that is based on the differing opinions that are discussed. As a result, mass media becomes a "potential force for a new kind of cohesion, able to connect scattered individuals in a shared national, city, and local experience” . Mass media bring people together by providing the backdrop of a local identity to a nation or a city; it is this shared identity that creates a viable form of social cohesion by linking individual people together in a conversation. An essential aspect of mass media is that it is perpetuated by the people who buy into the media, by those who provide an audience and consume the product of the media. In this sense, mass media is based on a social feedback cycle; the audiences of mass media provide and approve of the content of the mass media, which in turn provides material that the people of a community will accept and approve of. Charlton agrees with this sentiment as he expresses his theory that mass media functions in a way that brings communities together. According to Charlton, "The cohesion induced by the mass media is based upon attracting attention, and therefore depends intrinsically upon a wide range of media content to appeal to many social groups and divisions". It is through appealing to a diverse range of people within a community that social cohesion can be experienced. When people can see their own values and beliefs reflected back at them, they can identify with the medium that is presenting this idea. This becomes particularly evident when looking at newspapers in modern society.

Newspapers
Mass media, newspapers in particular, can bridge the gap between the public and the private; "this point is especially relevant … when the boundaries between public and private and large scale and individual communication networks are increasingly blurred". Newspapers have been part of communities for decades and are an established foundation of social cohesion. The unique feature that newspapers (as well as other printed material, such as books and magazines) bring to mass media is that of the printed word. Words have different meanings to different people based on the social contexts and environments in which they come from; as a result, audience participation through reader interpretation becomes an integral part of the cohesive nature of newspapers. The printed word creates a tangible link between people. Anyone from anywhere in a nation can read the words written by another member of the same society. It is in this respect that newspapers create a foundational identity for a nation, a city or even a local community to associate with. The printed word can cross all these nuances of a society and facilitate discussions between different communities. Charlton addresses this divisive nature of mass media by stating that "the modern mass media therefore cuts across and tends to break up many traditional social groupings", which becomes apparent when viewing the role newspapers have in creating social cohesion. Newspapers break up social grouping based on political affiliations, religious ideals, gender roles and other such groupings that previously existed; they speak to individuals and demand an individual interpretation of what is written. The root of Charlton’s theory of society is that the act of paying attention to a particular medium is what ultimately creates a cohesive identity for a nation. Newspapers fit into this theoretical outline because the only way that people can interact with the printed word is by paying attention to it. The idea that mass media has the capacity to serve as a form of viable social cohesion is very real. Newspapers, as a facet of the mass media, illustrate how separate communities are able to engage in a social dialogue through the use of the written word. Through the example of newspapers, the socially cohesive nature of mass media can be seen as it "has the capacity to unite scattered individuals within the same large audience, or to integrate newcomers into urban communities and immigrants into a new country by providing a common set of values, ideas and information and helping to form identities”, newspapers are capable of integrating individuals into a community by providing a snapshot of a cohesive social unit. However, this aspect of mass media is not best observed through the use of newspapers, but rather, from the use of television.

Television
Television operates on a feedback cycle very similar to that of newspapers; it provides a reality and opinions that are experienced in the world and reflects them back on the viewers. This forms a cohesive bond between individuals as they share a common reality that they can observe in the media they consume. Television attracts attention by bridging gaps in society and bringing people together into fan groups that surround a television program. The fan groups that surround television programs are referred to as fandoms, communities of individuals who share a common fascination with particular television shows and the content, characters and messages that the show portrays. Fandoms are created by the people, they are "about participating somehow in the story and becoming part of the social audience surrounding a show", Television shows provide a core of beliefs that people rally around. Whether it is a sitcom or a soap opera, a reality show or even a documentary program, television expresses moral and ethical points of interest for people to encounter in a way that is not outright didactic. The inherent entertaining nature of television allows for an increased level of interaction as it relies on the interpretations of the individuals; it allows individuals to "create new meaning out of material offered, building up systems of social identification and association which serve to detach the fan group from the manipulative grip of the media". It is about finding a community that you can fit into and identify with the values and beliefs that are perpetuated in the content of the show. Watching TV is more than just watching a show on a screen, it is about intellectually engaging with the content, seeing the individual in the characters of the show and engaging in a conversation with shows that are fundamentally different. Television invites participation from the audience in so far as its goal is to create a reaction in those who view the material. Whether it is positive or negative doesn't matter, the important thing is that people are viewing programs and reacting to what they see, either because they can identify with the images or because they feel alienated from what they see. Charlton recognizes this as he posits in his theory that "Modern societies are importantly held together by their arguments and differences...it is often the disputes which provide the attentional focus around which society coheres". Mass media, particularly television, is inherently divisive in nature. Since there is a wide variety of television programs out there for people to watch there are just as many perspectives for people to encounter, many of which may be different from their own. Mass media is limited to what sells, these outlets need to ensure what they produce is going to be enjoyed and consumed by the people of a community; otherwise it loses its audience and fails to fulfill its function of drawing the attention of the people. Social cohesion via the mass media is an unintentional consequence of the media's attempts to gain an independent audience; by seeking public attention the mass media defines an audience which come together to form a cohesive social unit.

Social Cohesion and the Internet
It can be argued that the internet is a part of the general definition of media; it fulfills many of the same functions of mass media, such as facilitating communication, connecting widespread communities to each other and allowing the flow of information, whether it be for entertainment or educational purposes, to pass from individuals to communities at large. However, the way that the internet goes about this sharing of information is different from that of mass media. It is often argued that the advancement of technology to the point where people can communicate with each other without being in the same physical space has led to a society that is anti-social, that shies away from face-to-face contact and as a result is left with unresolved conversation about important social issues. However, "studies continue to show that internet users are often more socially active than non-users, and are less alienated from others. And thanks to e-mail and instant messaging, the Internet has become a useful tool to build relationships; Internet users communicate with others more, not less". This conclusion illustrates the way that the internet allows societies to thrive and develop a sense of cohesion between different factions on the internet. Communication between members of a community has becomes easy with the advances in media technology where conversations can take place with two people being in different countries. The internet is a connection of networks, comprised of online communities that are loosely defined based on their existence in cyberspace; they do not have a physical space that they occupy in the world. However, this lack of physical space allows for social cohesion to exist in a way that is unexplored in mass media as it allows for people from all over the world to come into contact with each other without the pressures of societal biases to block the transmission of ideas. Song claims that "on the internet, people have the potential to experience the benefits of communal life with none of the burdens. They can share their deepest secrets without risking their personal privacy". The internet creates a necessary veil of secrecy that covers certain aspects about individuals that can block the free trade of ideas and places the responsibility of revealing personal information in the hands of the users. This becomes especially important when discussing virtual communities.

Social Media
Over the past five years the social aspects of the internet have grown in their importance to the functioning of society. Today, logging into a social media website is second nature to most people; these websites have become a part of modern life. As a result, communicating with other individuals has become a "form of normal social behaviour and an acceptable substitute for actual social interaction. It is widely perceived as a significant 'agent of socialization' -- an occasion for social learning and a means towards participation in wider society". Participation in society is a necessary factor of social cohesion; the internet makes this participation with global society easy, all you need is a computer and you can be connected to anyone around the world. However, an important aspect of social media websites is that "online communities have also uniquely functioned to facilitate the public’s immediate response to major events in the world". The immediacy of online content creates an interesting dynamic between the internet and mass media, often times with the internet winning out over the traditional modes of communication. A possibility for why this is the case could be that the online world allows for individuals to state their own cases, disseminate their own ideas without the filter of a print medium to slow them down. Social media can have a very real effect on the education of the masses by initiating conversations that are free from the control of mainstream media. Internet activist Myles Dyer openly advocates using social media "to participate in society and help to find real solutions to real problems". Connecting to people from around the world allows for access to different perspectives on important issues that plague the modern world. In modern societies that are held together by mass media that are grabbing attention, the Internet provides an outlet for people who want yet another point of view from people just on them on events that effect their communities. Dyer's mission statement underscores the argument that the internet can be used to achieve social cohesion as he believes that “we all have a place in society, and the internet can break down barriers that perhaps stopped us before achieving what we have always wanted to do" . The message that can be extracted from his very personal perspective of the internet is intricately connected to the notion of social cohesion. The internet is free from biases and doesn't actively strive to gain attention; rather, it is a place where those who want to be heard can speak their minds. In a recent video that shows how the internet and traditional mass media can be used together as a means to educate oneself on current events, Dyer uses the example of the Occupy Wall Street protests to show how the two forms of media interact. The metaphor that he uses is that of an iceberg, with the visible part being those people who are protesting that are given exposure in the mainstream media. The rest of the iceberg, that which cannot be seen but still exists under the surface, are those who contribute to the protests by using social media; these people "are a part of a global consciousness, one which the traditional mainstream media don't seem to be understanding". The widespread reach of the internet is foreign to those who adamantly rely on the mass media to obtain information; the strength of one form of social cohesion becomes the downfall of another.

Youtube
Youtube is an internet phenomenon that takes elements of mass media, particularly the visual aspect of television and broadcast media, and transfers it into a market that is free from inherent corporate and political biases. This is easiest to observe through the numerous video blogs that use Youtube as their home base. In 2007, brothers John and Hank Green embarked on a challenge to communicate with each other only through the medium of video blogs that were posted daily on Youtube. The result of this challenge was not only personal communication between two brothers, but out of these videos developed a community of like-minded individuals from all over the world who united under the title of 'nerdfighter'. An important observation about the nature of the original social experiment was made by John Green in an interview with NPR in 2008; he notes that communicating only through textual means devalues social interactions because "text is a very empty form of communication. When you go from actual physical presence to spoken word and then another step we moved to text, it becomes a much more shallow way of communicating". Youtube provides an outlet of that allows for pseudo-face-to-face interactions to take place. Video blogs, or vlogs, are a way for people to see and hear what someone else has to say, even if these two people are not in the same place. The important aspect of social cohesion that Youtube allows to take place is that of international communication. In this respect, it does not matter what topics are being discussed, the important thing is that people are coming into direct contact with people from different backgrounds -- that they would never have had the opportunity to meet before internet communication-- and talking about how they can continue to facilitate global communication. In an interview with a local Chicago news broadcast, John Green further talks about the message that this endeavour attempts to share with the world. The goal of the vlogbrothers is to "bring people who feel like they are on the outside into a place where they feel that they on the inside" which is a goal that is met with widespread success over the years that these brothers have been making videos. The success can arguably be attributed to the fact that their aim's parallel the aims of the internet in general. The internet provides a place for people who don't fit into the established communities that mainstream media targets. The audience of the internet is no one is particular, but everyone who wants to join in a conversation.