Jump to content

Internet culture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Digital culture)

Internet culture is a quasi-underground culture developed and maintained among frequent and active users of the Internet (also known as netizens) who primarily communicate with one another as members of online communities; that is, a culture whose influence is "mediated by computer screens" and information communication technology,[1]: 63  specifically the Internet.

Internet culture arises from the frequent interactions between members within various online communities and the use of these communities for communication, entertainment, business, and recreation. The earliest online communities of this kind were centered around the interests and hobbies of anonymous and pseudonymous early adopters, typically those with academic, technological, niche, criminal, or even subversive interests.[citation needed]

Studied aspects of Internet culture include anonymity/pseudonymity, social media, gaming and specific communities, such as fandoms, and has also raised questions about online identity and Internet privacy.[2]

The impact of Internet culture on predominately offline societies and cultures has been extensive, and elements of Internet culture increasingly impact everyday life.[citation needed] Likewise, increasingly widespread Internet adoption has influenced Internet culture; frequently provoking enforcing norms via shaming, censuring and censorship while pressuring other cultural expressions underground.[3]

Elements

[edit]

While Internet subcultures differ, subcultures those emerged in the environment of the early Internet maintain noticeably similar values.


Values

[edit]

Enlightenment principles are prominent in Internet culture, from which many other elements of the culture derive.[citation needed]. These principles can be attributed to the Internet's origins in Western, and specifically American, cultural contexts and the significant influence of academic culture, the hacker ethic and gamer culture, which to varying degrees embrace and amplify cultural values such as curious playfulness, competitiveness and collaborative self-actualization commonly pursued through community application of empirical rationalism via debate, competition and creative expression.

Concern for privacy is another discernable value. Internet culture reifies the right to privacy in order to protect freedom of expression, personal liberty and social equality,[4] thus making anonymity or pseudonymity a valued feature of online services for netizens. This is especially the case for freethinkers, social deviants, political dissidents, journalists, hacktivists/activists and members of hacker, (cyber)punk or other underground subcultures, where an absence of privacy may put an individual in danger. Originally the result of technical limitations, the prevalence of anonymity or pseudonymity is an integral part of Internet culture.[citation needed]

Playful curiosity is an additional value derived from the Internet's roots in both creative hacker culture and gamer culture, where a desire to understand complex problems and systems for their own sake, or to exploit for trivial, amusing or irrelevant ends, flourishes.[citation needed]

Disregard of authority mostly came by way of hackers who routinely broke/ignored laws and regulations in their Internet pursuits. It may have originated with hackers who discovered how to defeat telecom dialtone-based security in the 1970s to make phone calls without paying.

The value of competence was a fundamental requirement in the Internet's early days when many tasks were less than user-friendly and technical skill was required to accomplish anything. This was reinforced by Otaku and gaming cultures, where obsessive commitment and sometimes technical/mental skills are essential in order to excel in such hobbies.

Freedom of information (i.e. sharing and unlimited information access) was declared early to be a fundamental aspect of the Internet, underlined by the phrase "Information wants to be free".[5]: 7 

Coffee

[edit]
"The favorite beverage of the civilised world."
Thomas Jefferson, (February 14, 1824)[6]

Coffee is more common than tea in Internet culture, especially within hacking subculture and technical communities.[7] Coffee's higher caffeine content is attracted those in technical who spend long hours on high-focus tasks. A coffee pot was the subject of the first webcam stream on the Internet and the stream was used to monitor when it was time to make more coffee for the computer science lab that hosted the stream. Automating office coffee production was the subject of an April Fool's Day Internet standard called the Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol.

Preoccupations

[edit]

Provocative humor that is witty, dry, dark, macabre, self-deprecating, misanthropic and/or politically incorrect is arguably the most recognizable manifestation of Internet culture and its subcultures.[8][9][3] Copypasta, Dank Memes, and Shitposting showcase this emphasis. This humor often includes heavy satire and/or parody of mainstream culture, and the "playful, irreverent attitude" which it inherits from its parent subcultures.

Trolling is another preoccupation on the Internet. Starting with the presumption that nothing online should be taken seriously, a recipient's response to trolling (and not the act) functions as a shibboleth.[10][9]

Otaku (sometimes Weeaboo) sensibilities became popular via anonymous imageboards modelled after Japanese imageboards that hosted anime, manga and other Japanese popular culture materials.[citation needed].

Dissemination and spread

[edit]

Over the years, Internet users have interacted via a host of different online and offline protocols. Earlier ones such as Usenet and bulletin boards were later superseded by others such as social media. These include:

Internet subcultures

[edit]

As with other cultures, the Internet quickly fragmented into numerous subcultures, which continued to spawn descendants thereafter.

Early

[edit]

Newer

[edit]

History

[edit]

The cultural history of the Internet is a story of rapid change. The Internet developed in parallel with rapid and sustained technological advances in computing and data communication. Widespread access to the Internet emerged as the cost of infrastructure dropped by several orders of magnitude with consecutive technological improvements.

Though Internet culture originated during the creation and development of early online communities – such as those found on bulletin board systems before the Internet reached mainstream adoption in developed countries – many cultural elements have roots in other previously existing offline cultures and subcultures which predate the Internet. Specifically, Internet culture includes many elements of telegraphy culture (especially amateur radio culture), gaming culture and hacker culture.

Initially, digital culture tilted toward the Anglosphere. As a consequence of computer technology's early reliance on textual coding systems that were mainly adapted to the English language, Anglophone societies—followed by other societies with languages based on Latin script—enjoyed privileged access to digital culture. However, other languages have gradually increased in prominence. In specific, the proportion of content on the Internet that is in English has dropped from roughly 80% in the 1990s to around 52.9% in 2018.[11][12]

As technology advances, Internet Culture continues to change. The introduction of smartphones and tablet computers and the growing computer network infrastructure around the world have increased the number of Internet users and have likewise resulted in the proliferation and expansion of online communities. While Internet culture continues to evolve among active and frequent Internet users, it remains distinct from other previously offline cultures and subcultures which now have a presence online, even those cultures and subcultures from which Internet Culture borrows many elements.

One cultural antecedent of Internet culture was amateur radio (commonly known as ham radio). By connecting over great distances, ham operators were able to form a distinct cultural community with a strong technocratic foundation, as the radio gear involved was finicky and prone to failure. The area that later became Silicon Valley, where much of modern Internet technology originates, had been an early locus of radio engineering.[13] Alongside the original mandate for robustness and resiliency, the renegade spirit of the early ham radio community later infused the cultural value of decentralization and near-total rejection of regulation and political control that characterized the Internet's original growth era, with strong undercurrents of the Wild West spirit of the American frontier.

At its inception in the early 1970s as part of ARPANET, digital networks were small, institutional, arcane, and slow, which confined the majority of use to the exchange of textual information, such as interpersonal messages and source code. Access to these networks was largely limited to a technological elite based at a small number of prestigious universities; the original American network connected one computer in Utah with three in California.[14]

Text on these digital networks usually encoded in the ASCII character set, which was minimalistic even for established English typography, barely suited to other European languages sharing a Latin script (but with an additional requirement to support accented characters), and entirely unsuitable to any language not based on a Latin script, such as Mandarin, Arabic, or Hindi.

Interactive use was discouraged except for high value activities. Hence a store and forward architecture was employed for many message systems, functioning more like a post office than modern instant messaging; however, by the standards of postal mail, the system (when it worked) was stunningly fast and cheap. Among the heaviest users were those actively involved in advancing the technology, most of whom implicitly shared much the same base of arcane knowledge, effectively forming a technological priesthood.

A screenshot of a bulletin board system

The origins of social media predate the Internet proper. The first bulletin board system was created in 1978,[15] GEnie was created by General Electric in 1985[16][unreliable source?], the mailing list Listserv appeared in 1986[16][unreliable source?], and Internet Relay Chat was created in 1988.[16][unreliable source?] The first official[dubiousdiscuss] social media site, SixDegrees launched in 1997.[16][unreliable source?]

In the 1980s, the network grew to encompass most universities and many corporations, especially those involved with technology, including heavy but segregated participation within the American military–industrial complex. Use of interactivity grew, and the user base became less dominated by programmers, computer scientists and hawkish industrialists, but it remained largely an academic culture centered around institutions of higher learning. It was observed that each September, with an intake of new students, standards of productive discourse would plummet until the established user base brought the influx up to speed on cultural etiquette.

Commercial Internet service providers (ISPs) emerged in 1989 in the United States and Australia, opening the door for public participation. Soon the network was no longer dominated by academic culture, and the term eternal September, initially referring to September 1993, was coined as Internet slang for the endless intake of cultural newbies.

Commercial use became established alongside academic and professional use, beginning with a sharp rise in unsolicited commercial e-mail commonly called spam. Around this same time, the network transitioned to support the burgeoning World Wide Web. Multimedia formats such as audio, graphics, and video become commonplace and began to displace plain text, but multimedia remained painfully slow for dial-up users. Also around this time the Internet also began to internationalize, supporting most of the world's major languages, but support for many languages remained patchy and incomplete into the 2010s.

On the arrival of broadband access, file sharing services grew rapidly, especially of digital audio (with a prevalence of bootlegged commercial music) with the arrival of Napster in 1999 and similar projects which effectively catered to music enthusiasts, especially teenagers and young adults, soon becoming established as a prototype for rapid evolution into modern social media. Alongside ongoing challenges to traditional norms of intellectual property, business models of many of the largest Internet corporations evolved into what Shoshana Zuboff terms surveillance capitalism. Not only is social media a novel form of social culture, but also a novel form of economic culture where sharing is frictionless, but personal privacy has become a scarce good. In 1998, there was Hampster Dance, the first[dubiousdiscuss] successful Internet meme.[17]

In 1999, Aaron Peckham created Urban Dictionary, an online, crowdsourced dictionary of slang.[17] He had kept the server for Urban Dictionary under his bed.[17]

In 2000, there was great demand for images of a dress that Jennifer Lopez wore. As a result, Google's co-founders created Google Images.[17][18]

In 2001, Wikipedia was created.[17]

In 2004, Encyclopedia Dramatica, a wiki archive of Internet culture, was founded.[19]

In 2005, YouTube was created because people wanted to find videos of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction at the Super Bowl in 2004. YouTube was later acquired by Google in 2006.[17]

In 2009, Bitcoin was created.[17]

Since 2020, Internet culture has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.[20][better source needed]

Since 2021, there has been an unprecedented surge of interest in the concept of the metaverse.[21][22][unreliable source?] In particular, Facebook Inc. renamed itself to Meta Platforms in October 2021, amid the crisis of the Facebook Papers.[23]

Criticism

[edit]

One dark aspect of Internet culture is that it has allowed promoters of unhealthy behaviors such as cutting,[24] anorexia,[25] pedophilia,[26] and even organized theft[27] to gain prominence and establish online subcultures. As people spend more time on social media, this could lead to acting excessively and neglecting behaviors. This action may result in the perpetration of cyberbullying, social anxiety, depression, and exposure to inappropriate content that is not suitable for one's age.[28] Rude comments on posts can lower an individual's self-esteem, making them feel unworthy and may lead to depression. Social interaction online may also substitute face-to-face interactions for some people instead of acting as a supplement. This can negatively impact people's social skills and cause one to have feelings of loneliness. People may also face the chance of being cyberbullied when using online applications. Cyberbullying may include harassment, video shaming, impersonating, and much more. A concept described as "cyberbullying theory" is now being used to suggest that children who use social networking more frequently are more likely to become victims of cyberbullying.[29] Additionally, some evidence shows that too much Internet use can stunt memory and attention development in children. The ease of access to information which the Internet provides discourages information retention. However, the cognitive consequences are not yet fully known.[30] The staggering amount of available information online can lead to feelings of information overload. Some effects of this phenomenon include reduced comprehension, decision making, and behavior control.[30]

Identity – "architectures of credibility"

[edit]

One early study, conducted from 1998 to 1999, found that the participants view information obtained online as slightly more credible than information from magazines, radio, and television, information obtained from newspapers was the most credible.[31] Credibility online is established in much the same way that it is established in the offline world. Lawrence Lessig claimed that the architecture of a given online community may be the most important factor in establishing credibility. Factors include: anonymity, connection to physical identity, comment rating system, feedback type (positive vs positive/negative), moderation.[32]

Anonymity

[edit]

Many sites allow anonymous commentary, where the user-id attached to the comment is something like "guest". In an architecture that allows anonymous commentary, credibility attaches only to the object of the comment. Sites that require some link to an identity may require only a nickname that is sufficient to allow comment readers to rate the commenter, either explicitly, or by informal reputation.

Connection to physical identity

[edit]

Architectures can require that physical identity be associated with commentary, as in Lessig's example of Counsel Connect.[32]: 94–97  However, to require linkage to a physical identity, sensitive information about a user must be collected and safeguards for that collected information must be established – users must place sufficient trust in the site. Irrespective of safeguards, as with Counsel Connect,[32]: 94–97  use of physical identities links credibility across the frames of the Internet and real space, influencing the behaviors of those who contribute in those spaces. However, even purely online identities can establish credibility. Even though nothing inherently links a person or group to their Internet-based persona, credibility can be earned, because of the time required.[32]: 113 

Comment rating system

[edit]

In some architectures, commenters can, in turn, be rated by other users, potentially encouraging more responsible commentary, although the profusion of popular shitposters belies this.

Feedback type

[edit]

Architectures can be oriented around positive feedback or allow both positive and negative feedback. While a particular user may be able to equate fewer stars with a "negative" rating, the semantic difference is potentially important. The ability to actively downrate an identify may violate laws or norms.[33]

Moderation

[edit]

Architectures can give editorial control to a group or individual not employed by the site (e.g., Reddit), termed moderators. Moderation may take be either proactive (previewing contents) or reactive (punishing violators).

The moderator's credibility can be damaged by overly aggressive behavior.[1]

Digital culture

[edit]

Memes

[edit]

Internet culture is full of memes and other content that spreads rapidly.

Communities

[edit]

Internet culture thrives on online communities. These communities can be found on specialized forums, social media, or proprietary applications (e.g., Slack, Salesforce). They cater to specific hobbies, fandoms, or professions, creating spaces where individuals with similar interests can connect. Examples of such communities include the passionate "K-pop fandom" or tech enthusiasts.

Jargon

[edit]

Internet culture has a rapidly changing set of slang, acronyms, and jargon. These terms serve as recognizable ways to identify members and foster solidarity. Successful jargon often spreads beyond the initiating community. Examples of internet slang and jargon include "LOL" (laugh out loud) and "FTW" (for the win).

Gaming

[edit]

Gaming is a distinct facet of internet culture, with dedicated communities and supportive platforms such as Twitch. Competitive gaming and live streaming encompasses various subcultures is the basis of this community.

Social media

[edit]

Social media platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok have become fundamental support systems for Internet culture. These platforms support influencers, content creators, and celebrities. Influencers play a crucial role in shaping trends, promoting products, and engaging with their audiences. Other content creators cover every subject: eating, war, fitness, politics, etc.

Activism

[edit]

Internet culture is an important ecosystem for activism and social movements. Hashtags, petitions, and organizing have built and exploited online communities. Movements such as BlackLivesMatter and MeToo built strong online presences that increased their impact.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Rheingold, Howard (1993). "Daily Life in Cyberspace". The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-097641-1.
  2. ^ Silver, David (February 2004). "Internet/Cyberculture/ Digital Culture/New Media/ Fill-in-the-Blank Studies". New Media & Society. 6 (1): 55–64. doi:10.1177/1461444804039915. ISSN 1461-4448. S2CID 32041186. Archived from the original on 2020-09-03. Retrieved 2020-11-27.
  3. ^ a b Phillips, Whitney (2019). "It Wasn't Just the Trolls: Early Internet Culture, "Fun," and the Fires of Exclusionary Laughter". Social Media + Society. 5 (3). doi:10.1177/2056305119849493. S2CID 199164695.
  4. ^ "Pool's Closed". www.knowyourmeme.com. 11 April 2009. Archived from the original on 2020-07-20. Retrieved 2023-03-09.
  5. ^ Dariusz Jemielniak; Aleksandra Przegalinska (18 February 2020). Collaborative Society. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-35645-9. Archived from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved 21 October 2020.
  6. ^ Coffee https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/coffee/#fn-1 Archived 2023-03-09 at the Wayback Machine
  7. ^ "418 – I'm a teapot". www.slate.com. Archived from the original on 2023-03-09. Retrieved 2023-03-09.
  8. ^ Giselinde Kuipers, "Good Humor, Bad Taste: A Sociology of the Joke", ISBN 1501510894, 2015, pp.41, 42
  9. ^ a b Phillips, Whitney (21 May 2015). "RIP Trolling – How the internet has transformed dark humor". Slate. Archived from the original on 2023-03-09. Retrieved 2023-03-09.
  10. ^ "Consider the Troll". www.popmatters.com. 26 May 2016. Archived from the original on 2023-03-09. Retrieved 2023-03-09.
  11. ^ "The digital language divide". labs.theguardian.com. Archived from the original on 2022-05-27. Retrieved 2022-05-11.
  12. ^ "Chart of the day: The Internet has a language diversity problem". World Economic Forum. Archived from the original on 2022-05-11. Retrieved 2022-05-11.
  13. ^ Abate, Tom (29 September 2007). "High-tech culture of Silicon Valley originally formed around radio". SF Gate. Archived from the original on 18 January 2022. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  14. ^ Markoff, John (1999-12-20). "An Internet Pioneer Ponders the Next Revolution". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2008-09-22. Retrieved 2023-03-08.https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/12/biztech/articles/122099outlook-bobb.html Archived 2008-09-22 at the Wayback Machine
  15. ^ Edwards, Benj (2016-11-04). "The Lost Civilization of Dial-Up Bulletin Board Systems". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 2021-12-06. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  16. ^ a b c d Allebach, Nathan (2020-07-31). "A Brief History of Internet Culture and How Everything Became Absurd". The Startup. Archived from the original on 2022-02-04. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  17. ^ a b c d e f g Friedman, Linda Weiser; Friedman, Hershey H. (2015-07-09). "Connectivity and Convergence: A Whimsical History of Internet Culture". Rochester, NY. SSRN 2628901. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  18. ^ "Google It! Jennifer Lopez Wears That Grammys Dress—The One That Broke the Internet—20 Years Later at Versace". Vogue. 2019-09-20. Archived from the original on 2022-02-04. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  19. ^ "Encyclopedia Dramatica – Know Your Meme". Know Your Meme. 2022-02-01. Archived from the original on 2023-03-09. Retrieved 2023-03-09.
  20. ^ "COVID-19 changed global Internet culture, says app maker". Punch Newspapers. 2022-02-01. Archived from the original on 2022-02-04. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  21. ^ "Google Trends". Google Trends. Archived from the original on 2022-02-03. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  22. ^ "Framework for the Metaverse". MatthewBall.vc. Archived from the original on 2022-02-04. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  23. ^ "In the middle of a crisis, Facebook Inc. renames itself Meta". AP NEWS. 2021-10-28. Archived from the original on 2022-02-04. Retrieved 2022-02-04.
  24. ^ Diller, Lawrence. "Why are so many of my teen patients cutting themselves? We need to fix this now". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-09-22.
  25. ^ Morris, Anne M; Katzman, Debra K (2003). "The impact of the media on eating disorders in children and adolescents". Paediatrics & Child Health. 8 (5): 287–289. doi:10.1093/pch/8.5.287. ISSN 1205-7088. PMC 2792687. PMID 20020030.
  26. ^ Cano, Amparo Elizabeth; Fernandez, Miriam; Alani, Harith (2014), Aiello, Luca Maria; McFarland, Daniel (eds.), "Detecting Child Grooming Behaviour Patterns on Social Media", Social Informatics: 6th International Conference, SocInfo 2014, Barcelona, Spain, November 11-13, 2014. Proceedings, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 412–427, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-13734-6_30, ISBN 978-3-319-13734-6, retrieved 2024-09-22
  27. ^ "Miami burglary ring monitored social media before stealing jewelry – Jewelers' Security Alliance". jewelerssecurity.org. Retrieved 2024-09-22.
  28. ^ "Pros and Cons of Social Media". Lifespan. Archived from the original on 2023-05-04. Retrieved 2023-05-04.
  29. ^ McDool, Emily; Powell, Philip; Roberts, Jennifer; Taylor, Karl (2020-01-01). "The internet and children's psychological wellbeing". Journal of Health Economics. 69: 102274. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2019.102274. ISSN 0167-6296. PMID 31887480.
  30. ^ a b Union, Publications Office of the European (2020-08-13). Potential negative effects of internet use : in-depth analysis. European Parliament. ISBN 9789284664610. Archived from the original on 2021-01-02. Retrieved 2020-11-03. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  31. ^ Flanagin, Andrew J.; Metzger, Miriam J. (September 2000). "Perceptions of Internet Information Credibility". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 77 (3): 515–540. doi:10.1177/107769900007700304. ISSN 1077-6990. S2CID 15996706. Archived from the original on 2021-02-25. Retrieved 2020-11-27.
  32. ^ a b c d Lessig, Lawrence (2006). Code 2.0: Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-03914-2.
  33. ^ Goldsmith, Jack; Wu, Tim (2006). Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World. Oxford University Press (US). p. 143. ISBN 0-19-515266-2.

Further reading

[edit]