Internet use is a phenomenon that has played an important role in
certain segments of the global society during the past few years. It is
arguably changing the way in which many, traditionally personal
interactions take place. From e-mail and usenet groups to Amazon.com
and instant stock updates, the Internet offers many new communication
and transaction options. There is much debate about the extent to which
the Internet has and will change our lives. Some speculate that the
Internet will grow into a major technological interface to the
acquisition of our every desire and believe that eventually most of our
time-draining transaction and interaction will take place through a few
clicks of the mouse. Others see the Internet as a fad that has a few
practical aspects such as the easy, instant communication that e-mail
provides. Both views are extreme and it is most likely that reality
lies somewhere in between a cyberutopia and a mostly frivolous,
computer-nerd playground. But, the consensus is that the Internet will
cause some significant changes in the way we run our lives.
How has and how will the online world change our global society? To
what extent will these changes take place? These are questions that can
be answered partly through the study of demographical statistics and
partly through the context of modern sociological views. Surveys and
Internet usage statistics show who is on the Internet and why. The
sociological perspective gives a basis for hypothesizing about the
ramifications that cyberspace will have on society.
For relevant demographic studies I have turned to the Internet because
it contains a wide variety of specific information that is easily
accessible. There are several sites devoted to the study of Internet
usage statistics. They obtain their information through group surveys
and active technological investigation such as sending out robots to
count host computers or pinging a randomized fraction of the declared
Internet hosts. To get an overall picture of Internet usage as it
differs from society to society, Global Reach, an Internet marketing
statistics company, has provided information about Internet use by
speakers of different languages. To get a real feeling of how
US-dominated the online world is, note that English-speakers account for
55% of the Internet community. Compare this to the fact that there are
about 470 million English-speaking people in the world as opposed to the
5.52 billion other people. This means that the Internet is extremely
disproportional with respect to the background of its users. Also, with
respect to the online cultural question, how influential can any
Internet society or culture be when only about a 32nd of the world’s
population is involved? Certain groups have closer ties to the Internet
than others so these people will be affected whereas the
non-participants will not.
Far from being a miniaturized model of global society, it is
predominantly an English-based electronic environment. This is mostly
due to the origination and cultivation of the Internet in the United
States and other western countries which have the powerful economic base
necessary for the investment in such enterprises and the motivation to
excel in the technological fields. The sociologist Huntington argues
that one major indication civilizational lines is common language. He
would note that the Internet is dominated by the Western presence. What
does this mean for the so-called Internet culture? Is the Internet to
be a forum for the mixing of world views and experiences or a strongly
Westernized social environment? Presently, it seems to be run mostly by
Western powers: America, Europe, and Japan. The evidence for this is
that the two next-frequently spoken languages of Internet users are,
unsurprisingly, German and Japanese. Huntington might set Japan apart
as its own civilization, but it has been westernized enough through
considerable contact with Europe and the United States to warrant
classification as a Western power. Although the Internet is mostly a
Western creation with a largely Western user base, there are trends in
Internet use that suggest the evolution of a more diverse Internet
society.
Other large, non-English-speaking countries are increasing their
participation rapidly. China, for instance, has embarked on an
ambitious country-wide program to increase their presence online. The
America-based company Matrix East Inc. and Hong Kong’s Big Brains Ltd.
have estimated that China has about 2.4 Internet users and the online
population is projected to reach 9 million by the year 2000. Also,
Internation Communications Inc. reports that the user base in Brazil
grew by about a factor of 10 between January 1996 and December 1997.
While the United States Internet users number about 60 million, the US
user growth rate has slowed significantly. So the representation of
other cultures should increase in the near future depending upon the
modernization of the countries in which these cultures reside.
Now all of these facts and figures establish present conditions and
trends of the Internet user base, but they do not shed light on the
motivation for participation in online culture and interaction. We know
who is on the Internet, but why are they there, and does their
participation affect social conditions? Is online culture a modern
manifestation of civil society? Psychologists argue that some Internet
phenomena are actually counter-societal such as the de-personalization
of financial transactions. Mom and pop stores are replaced by
convenient, user-friendly, computer-driven interfaces. The researcher
Putnam would look for the existence of online associations to determine
if there is any social capital being produced or maintained through the
Internet. Maybe Putnam would insist on a more face-to-face
associational relationship, but for the sake of argument, allow that
social capital can manifest itself in this new, electronic way.
E-mail serves as a speedy communication tool that keeps people in
contact with one another, but there are also several types of social
forums on the Internet. Users can post to newsgroups or apply for
membership to listservers. Another form of online association is
Internet Relay Chat (IRC) or other similar, real-time conversational
tools that allow people to send typed messages to each other. True,
these associations are all a lot looser and less organized than bowling
leagues, soccer teams, or bird-watching clubs, but the essential concept
of human (via phoneline) interaction is still present. These Internet
communication services are all strictly online forms of human
interaction, and our definition of civil society needs to be broadened
to include these new forms of association because as the role of the
Internet expands and its user base grows, online human communication
will play a greater role in the creation and maintenance of personal
relationships.