Over the last 15 years (or more), the Internet has become an essential part of modern society, specifically through social interaction. Steve Jobs has cult following and Mark Zuckerberg is a household name. Technology, and with it the Internet has changed human interaction, and not necessarily for the better or worse. No longer does one need to be face to face or hear a voice to have an interaction with someone. People have whole other existences in Second Life or video games like World of Warcraft. This raises the question: are online interactions truly interactions if it exists only in the virtual world of the Internet? And if so, should those interactions be distinct from the face-to-face reactions? In a sense, the Internet has called into question the concept of this world, the human reality. The phrase, IRL, which is an acronym for ‘in real life,’ has become popular in distinguishing between the off-line reality and the online reality. There are many ways to unpack this term, but I would like to focus on its function as a place to express an extended identity or version of one’s self.
However, before I approach identification online, it is necessary to examine the large number of forums, message boards, and media websites that focus on social interaction. It is easiest to separate the websites that assume representations of the off-line self into categories: those that use a persona decidedly different from the off-line self (arguably more authentic) and those that thrive off anonymity. Facebook and Instagram are two that fall into the first category because it is a very literal representation of actual events taking place in your life, with photos, check ins and a friend list of focused around one know offline. Twitter belongs in both the first and the second category because it can be used for either, but is usually a mix of people you know, organizations and people you admire, and people you don’t know and will never meet. Reddit and Imgur would be examples of sites where anonymity is the prevalent form of identification; people make up user names and create a new, possibly more honest version of their identity in the online world.
This is to say that there are different identities associated with each reality: an online persona and then the persona used when interacting on a face-to-face basis. The difference between these identities is vague and undefined, but it is possible to assume through own experience that the online interactions is more authentic, due to the umbrella of anonymity the web provides. For instance, there has been very little legislation restricting behavior on the Internet, and the sheer vastness of space and information make finding any one specific person challenging — especially if one is not a professional hacker or working at an intelligence agency. Online spaces like Reddit, Imgur and other not-networking websites allow users free reign to either create an entirely fantastical persona or be the truer selves they might be too afraid to be offline. However, the strong integration of twitter and facebook into our culture, specifically the workplace, makes for a much milder persona on those specific websites.
In an article from The Atlantic by Rebecca J. Rosen, the writer looks at a TED talk from 2012 that explains why assuming real life and online life are not equally ‘real’ is detrimental. In the TED Talk, Alexandra Samuels states, “When you’re online, you’re often more real, more authentic, than you would be offline.” She argues that user anonymity provides a sphere without judgment, which allows the freedom for behavior or opinions deemed weird or odd by mainstream society. I believe this more authentic self is possible, but sometimes authenticity is extremely harmful, specifically with Internet trolls, Internet bullying, etc. Is it okay for people to cause suicides under the guise of anonymity? Should there be consequences for that? Some might argue yes because anonymity is the only thing allowing a user to behave that way, but another point of view would warn against legislating Internet for fear of losing free speech. Maybe the reality of face-to-face confrontation or the threat of legal consequences would stop the more abhorrent bullying behaviors; then again, maybe it wouldn’t.
Additionally, there is a whole meme devoted to ‘me IRL’, which usually involves a photo of someone doing something awkward or silly and is meant as a joke. This calls into question the how literally the term ‘real’ is being applied. The meme seem to acknowledge that this is a representation of real life in that moment. Whether the photo features someone really tired, excited or some other extreme emotion, it is a real reflection of a state of mind. Reality is always changing because perspective is always changing and being constantly affected by emotional states. The reality is that our identities are shaped by the ways we express ourselves and the internet is a form of expression. By sharing opinions, posting humorous photos, sharing articles, one is expressing parts of their personality. It seems that instead of viewing the internet as a fake interaction, it might be better understood as an extended version of ones self. The basic primary self would be the offline or physical manifestations of interaction, while the online and the virtual are an extension of that self. It’s possible that whatever one finds trouble expressing offline, one will seek through virtual connections.
In conclusion, there are many functions of the Internet, and self-expression is certainly one of them; the popularity of ‘me irl’ memes and the entire culture that has risen around the idea of ‘selfies’ can attest to that. However, in addition to the social media, the internet has become an important news source and an acceptable publishing forum (cough, cough…Medium). The reliability of news sources and publishing are no longer guaranteed. Anyone can publish anything under any name and anyone can read it. Not only does this throw accountability into limbo, but it also takes away the careful curation of a magazine. Now articles are seen alone, alongside an archive of thousands of other articles, or (even worse) just floating in a sea of google search links. How has the overload and lack of curation on the internet changed the identities of publications or new outlets and their interactions with each other and readers? How does that play into the extension of the personal identity online and offline? To what extent (and how) is the internet changing our innermost selves and the outermost identities of the media?
