Exclusion vs. Inclusion.
Actually, the key to social networking probably isn't in what these networks offer,
but in the fact that they don't offer it to everybody. I doubt that many of us
would find much logic in belonging to an online social network of people who are
just like us. The underlying purpose of these networks is to benefit from some
status rubbing off on us. If the people with whom we network are no more than
run of the mill web surfers (like ourselves), we don't need the network.
On the other hand, I doubt that many people would want to openly claim that they
want to join a social network in order to climb a social ladder. Probably because
of this, Orkut's promotional site
offers us the banal, and unconvincing, "benefits" of a network:
orkut makes it easy to find people who share your hobbies and interests, look for romantic connections or establish new business contacts. You can also create and join a wide variety of online communities to discuss current events, reconnect with old college buddies or even exchange cookies recipes.
Which makes it hard not to ask how it's any different
from simply logging into any one of a vast number of less self-conscious online
communities. The answer, of course, lies in the fact that not everybody can join.
We don't want to exchange recipes with people like us, we want to exchange them
with heavies, with movers, with people who matter. And networks such as this,
much more than selling community, sell the illusion
of belonging to something truly important.
Go to: Do we need this?, or
Go to: Who cares?