to facebook or not to facebook?

Music: The Dandy Warhols: Thirteen Tales from Urban Bohemia (2000)

A few days ago I "unfriended" approximately three hundred people from my "old" Facebook account and invited them to join my newer profile. This process took a long time, but I feel relieved having made the "transition." On the new profile page, I'm much more circumspect about what I "post" as a link, status-update, and so on, and I have set the privacy settings to give me the most control (as much as possible) over who can "tag" me in photographs, posts, and so on.

Before I did this, I posted as a status a long rationale for why I am making the change. I'll share that here, and then add some comments too.

Dear Facebook Friends,

Over the next few of weeks I will be "un-friending" or "de-friending" most of you on this account, and inviting you to "add" me on a different Facebook account under my actual name (search "Joshua Gunn"). This note endeavors to explain why.

A couple of years ago John Sloop asked me to think with him about the character of social networking using Foucaulidan software. John wrote most of the code. The parameters he set inspired me to think hard about Facebook's function, and we were able to think-through this new social reality we occupy here together. The result was a couple of publications in which we advance a number of critical observations about the increasingly +compulsory+ character of Facebook and how that creates some interesting new "power" dynamics. The general argument cannot be summarized here, but the gist is that social networking has imploded what we once knew as "public" and "private," and potentially gives access to private parts (broadly construed) we'd rather not be "public," or at least should not be "equal access" (You can download a PDF of one of pieces here.

When I joined Facebook, my friends consisted of folks I had dinner with, shared embarrassing personal moments with---not to mention victims of my poorly memorized dirty jokes. Facebook used to be the new "MySpace," which was the new "Friendster," which was the new "Livebook" and "Nervenet." Those older networking sites were very different---and had a stronger illusion of privacy simply because they were much, much smaller in scope. When I think about the world I inhabited in 1999 with my Livebook "friends" and compare it to what Facebook is today, it's truly jaw-dropping---in size, in scope, in what this so-called social networking thing has become. And very few of us can +really+ claim to make sense of it.

As Facebook has evolved, it has horizontalized, fanning across a mediascape that is no longer possible to envision. Much more narrowly: I've picked up friends who were former classmates from 15 (sometimes 20) years ago. Family members. Friends with whom I have never dined with---even the parents of friends. I have almost five hundred "friends." Who are you all? Well, if I go down the list one-by-one I know you. But this exercize stretches the concept of "friend" pretty broadly, from acquaintance to buddy to "oh, I liked that guy in the elevator." Declining a friend request is fraught with anxiety now; and having a request denied or ignored can make a person feel bad. Facebook is compulsory in ways we're only starting to understand, and the consequences in the larger socio-cultural-economic matrix are no less murky.

It seems like within a wink (ok, a four years-long wink) the social landscape has changed, revolutionized, morphed. Like, whoa!

But here's the thing: Facebook has altered its interface so much that the "privacy settings" and so forth are so complicated I cannot figure them out. It used to be I could post a status and select "groups" of folks who could see it, but then the network of friend's friends and so forth could see it, and then I'd click a subdirectory to say "no" to that, and so on. It just got so complex I gave up. As a consequence I've offended some of you. I've inadvertently insulted others whom I don't really know. And gosh knows one of my buddy's parents has seen me "tagged" in a photo posted by someone else, in which I'm suckling milk from a ceremonial goat hoisted above the heads . . . oh, wait a minute. I think they deleted that photograph. Nevermind.

Anyhoo---my point is that I'm giving up on the complexity of privacy settings. I've given up on posting and then deleting "heat of the moment" status updates. And I'm caused to think that that this account is so +old+ that it bears the traces of a history I'd rather keep among those who were party to that history. It bears the history of a very dated way of thinking about social networking that is no longer true of today.

Because Facebook has transformed from a---however illusory---interface of private, friendly interaction to one of public personae and self-publicity, I am slowly shifting folks over to my newer "Joshua Gunn" account. It'll take some time. Weeks, if not months.

I learned some years ago that shutting down this account suddenly, or "de-friending" folks without explanation, is upsetting to many. Some of you are thinking this all sounds like self-important blather. I'd agree with you. But there are others who will be offended by discovering I "de-friended" them, and I know that for a fact. Hence this long-winded note.

For those who take the social network more seriously, understand I NOW believe that one's posts on Facebook can have serious, material consequences. It's thick with power, discipline, and surveillance. For example, it is commonplace for potential employers to survey one's Facebook profile for hiring decisions. There are countless stories of folks getting fired for status updates (and incriminating photos). The list of implications infused with power is a long one, so I won't belabor the point except to say: if you and I have a relation of power---if you're my former student, for example, or if you're my employer or represent my employer---then THIS account is most likely not the best place for us to interact.

Facebook used to be akin to my home office and pub; it is now the work office and reception hall. The "King Rhombosis" account reflects the former mentality and not the new reality---most especially with the title. It used to be the case one rarely if ever used one's actual name in online networking interfaces! "King Rhombosis" reflects that older reality (oh, how many times I have had to explain why I don't use my real name on this account . . . "it's old skool computer geek" never seems to explain it quickly anymore).

So, I'm trying to make the transition; I'm trying to accept the change and comport my online interactions similarly.

One might respond: "But Josh, do you have something to hide?"

"Yes," I reply. "Yes I do. That's why I wear clothes."

If you're already friends with me on my "Joshua Gunn" account, you'll notice little change. If you're not, you may save me some time by "adding" me there.

A suspect more than a few hundred of you will not be reading this note, which I reckon only underscores my reasoning.

Anyhoo, them's my quick-and-dirty answers for "why'd you de-friend me, bro?"

See you on the other side/site.

Although I did not want to, I even defriended good friends who are colleagues and students. The rationale here is that in addition to friendship, I have a working relationship with them too---there are multiple roles we each play. And insofar as some of those roles concern institutional power (e.g., I sit on his or her Ph.D. committee), it seems to me that it's a good rule that keeping it more-or-less professional online saves face all around. I may "throw down" and party with students, for example, but that doesn't need to be documented to a friend list that spans from acquaintances to my boss.

In response to this move, a friend messaged me and asked what I thought about Facebook snooping by potential employers for a graduate student going on the job market. I responded that it is definitely something to think about. At the very least, I suggested a thorough scrubbing of what's on the Facebook page, or perhaps (as I have) a second account. She thought that would be too much work to maintain. It is, I agree, work.

Two years ago I probably would not have given the same advice. But since that time I've observed a number of things. A local acquaintance got fired from teaching because she had some racy photos of herself on Facebook. A recent story on NPR was broadcast last week about employers actively vetting the Facebook pages of potential hires, and there have been a few instances of employers asking for an applicant's password. I've overheard colleagues discussing the status updates of students in meetings at the office. I'm sure you could supply your own stories about the increasingly permeable boundaries between what is presumed to be "private" and what is ostensibly "public."

Think about it this way, from a more personal angle: you meet a person that strikes your romantic fancy. Do you see if they have a Facebook page? If they do, do you try to look at their posted photographs and status messages? I bet you do. It's very tempting. And if so, how different is that from an employer wanting to know more about whom she is about to hire?

So, if you're a grad on the job market, yes, censor yourself. You may think you have nothing to hide, however, even that attitude can raise some eyebrows. The CIA would probably not want to hire you, for instance.

In short: be careful.