The Web Changes How We Define Friendship

There's an old saying: "you can never have too much money or friends." But that's before social networking came along. And while the adage for money still rings true, a shift maybe under way in how we define friendship. You can thank the web and social nets for that.

The American Heritiage Dictionary defines a "friend" primarily as ...

A person whom one knows, likes, and trusts.
A person whom one knows; an acquaintance.
A person with whom one is allied in a struggle or cause; a comrade.
One who supports, sympathizes with, or patronizes a group, cause, or movement: friends of the clean air movement.

Wikipedia goes a step further. It notes that in the US and elsewhere that quality of friendships has been steadily declining.

It seems, at least to me, that how we define who is/isn't a friend has changed dramatically. The Gig blog notes that this is particularly a dilemma on Facebook. Where as on other social networks, like Twitter, I let everyone in, on Facebook I have limited my network to only those who I have corresponded with or met in person. I go by the traditional definition. This unfortunately leaves many people sitting in Facebook purgatory. I don't add them to my network, yet I don't have the guts to outright Faceslam them either.

Others take a very different view. Some people I know (I won't mention them by name) like to regularly brag about how many friends they have on Facebook. I don't blame them for saying so. I blame society. In America at least, he/she who can dies with the most friends - even if they are virtual - "wins."

It's clear from all of this that our entire concept of friendships is changing. It's becoming more about quantity and less about quality.

This can be a very good thing. I am friends with people in social networks from other countries. Technology makes that possible.

On the other hand, these same technologies enable anyone to add me as a friend, even though we've never met.

It leaves me all confused about what friendship will look like in 10 years. It seems like it's declining in quality, even as technology scales it in quantity and helps our networks spread far and wide. What's your view?

Comments

[Mike]

I think too many people are far too quick to equate Facebook's use of the word "friend" with actual friendship. I see it as overthinking the whole situation. All that matters is what you want to get out of it. If you want to stay in touch with people you know, limit your "Facebook friends" to those people for that purpose. If, like Robert Scoble, for example, you want to (honorably) give everyone who "applies" their due and grow a huge list of Facebook friends/followers, rock on.

Either way, it's a waste of brain space to feel so conflicted or confused about this stuff. If someone is offended because you don't know them and you didn't feel like making them a Facebook friend, that's their problem, not yours.

Maybe I'm oversimplifying, but we could use a little of that.

[Gerald Buckley]

It really comes down to a personal read of the thing. Doesn't it?

Some, as Mike says above, will be offended they're not your Facebook Friend (sorry dad). Others will ease right on in to that slot and maybe never have met face to face. So, what is a 'friend'? IMHO, it's a bad moniker we took to (much like Web 2.0). In the absence of something better we nominated a de facto term and, well, there we go.

It sounds better than Kemosabe (I can say that and get away with it, I'm Cherokee) or "person who I've never met but would like to add to my list of carbon life forms". C'mon! Given the alternatives what would YOU have picked!? :)

[Yehuda Berlinger]

I think the key word is "define" here. Maybe the word friend is getting deluded, but the idea isn't.

My friends are the ones I will ask to borrow money from, will comfort me when my dog gets lost at the airport, come over dinner, take me out to a movie, and so on.

What Facebook and so on call friends I call acquaintances, business or personal.

Yehuda

[Susan Reynolds]

Great topic, Steve and a dilemma for all of us except those firmly entrenched on both ends of the continuum. While for the purists "friends" is taken literally and for the "big frienders" the term means nothing more than a name in an address book, I on the sliding scale would love to have had a cup of coffee with everyone who is in my facebook friends list. Because of distance and physical factors I simply haven't had the opportunity.

And while I don't consider all of them friends in the true sense of the word, some have grown to be that through shared interests, experiences and interaction. Some are acquaintances. Some are virtual colleagues. But I try not to draw lines hard and fast and Facebook prompted or not, it's not a meaningless term.

Many facebook contacts are in groups I'm in or read my blog. Some I've encountered through twitter. When speaking about them to others I might use terms like "someone I know from twitter" or "someone I met in Second Life" but they grow into roles as friends over time, or as people we met in high school often do, we lose interest and fade away.

Our interaction is like my grandmother might have had over the fence while hanging out laundry. Sometimes casual, sometimes serious, prompted by where we are, what we're doing or who we know in common.

A curious thing however is that I know more about many of these online friends than I do about my closest real life neighbors. Somehow, I just can't dismiss these sometimes tenuous relationships as meaningless, no matter how unwieldy the words are.

---

As an aside which might be helpful to others, when someone sends a facebook friend request I don't say yes unless I recognize the name or a note comes along explaining how we connect. Likewise, I try to do the same when I send a request if there's any doubt that the person will recognize my name. It's not that I doubt that we do have some link - I blame my memory, twitter names, Second Life names and a myriad of other reasons why I might need a clue. Doing this would be helpful to many of us who have virtual connections.

[Brian Caldwell]

In a social networking sense are "friends", "followers" and "rss subscribers" all the same thing?

[Susan Reynolds]

I don't see RSS subscribers in the same way - mainly because for the most part they are passive. "Friends" connotes some sort of action on their part, interaction with me or the community in which we're making contact.

[/pd]

A friend helps you move into a new home.
A good friend helps you move bodies !!

on the WEb.. a good friend helps you move web pages :)-

[John Whiteside]

I kind of laughed as I read this because you're saying that "friend" doesn't mean what it used to, but at least you have more of them!

To some degree this is semantics; we know who our real friends are. The interesting sociological issue is what it means when we start interacting with actual friends through these web tools, which tend to work out to a much lower level of commitment to and communication with friends.

Take what you see on Twitter (please) - lots of chatter but almost nothing of depth. Plus the Twitter distraction factor - when I see tweets where someone says, "I'm sitting here with my friend ___," I think, "And you're tapping on your mobile phone or laptop? You're crappy company, aren't you?"

Will the distraction of faux-friendship degrade actual friendship? That would be a real tragedy. How will people learn to separate out friends from Friends 2.0, and how will they interact differently with the two groups? These are interesting questions.

[Anne Zelenka]

Seems to me the social web can help or hinder friendship depending on how you approach it. I try not to get caught up in counting "friends" or even contacts on social networks, because the real power comes when I make authentic connections.

It's a natural human tendency to focus on social rank, and number of contacts is a good proxy for that. But as good as high social rank feels, it's no substitute for solid human relationships.

For me, the growth in social networking options has not diluted real friendship in the least. I have more friends now than before the age of the web; some who are online only (but I'd love to meet in person), some who are on and offline, and some who are only offline. I also have rebuilt friendships from the past as online-only, since we're too far away to get together in person.

[Ed Kohler]

What makes a friend a friend? Would you tell another friend that that person is your friend?

[Stephen Collins]

Steve, I've had this conversation with several people online and offline recently. It's obviously high in several people's thoughts.

My belief is that the web not so much changes how we define friend, but that many of the applications we're using, in an effort to drive their social aspect are missing a layer of detail. One that probably wouldn't be terribly challenging to implement.

For example, I like the friend/family/contact granularity Flickr offers. I like the business/personal granularity Plaxo offers.

I think the applications that fail to offer at least three layers of familiarity; business contact, personal contact, friend/family contact, are under-doing their functionality.

That said, with Twitter's follow concept, the differentiation isn't really needed. Facebook on the other hand, desperately needs granularity of relationship.

I keep this granularity active in my head and expose information as appropriate to the various contacts I have across the scoial networks I use with any regularity.

Like Anne Z above (Hi, Anne! How's Denver?) I am able to maintain more relationships of a friend or friendly colleague nature than I ever was before the web. Tools like Facebook allow me to manage the occasional contact needed to keep those relationships fresh.

[Steve Woodruff]

In general (and perhaps with a dash of oversimplification), I've tended to see relationships falling into three orbits - acquaintances, friends, and intimates (REALLY close friends). The term "friend" is now being misapplied to cover both friends and acquaintances. So, maybe soon, we'll have friends, Friends, and FRIENDS.

[Mickeleh]

Growing up watching The Tonight Show starring Johnny Carson, I came to understand that everyone in showbiz was friends--even close personal friends--with everyone else. Now on the Web, we're all in showbiz, aren't we. So now we're all close personal friends. And as long as we are, can I ask you all to spot me a twenty. Thanks, pals.

[Thiane]

I agree with you at some point but popularity is one of the reasons why you are who you are. Maybe you are facing what every celebrity suffers from: millions of fans following you. But on the web you´re easily found and added. I guess you should invite your real friends for a barbecue on Sunday and leave the web for those you´ve done so much to influence...

[Vincent van Wylick]

Please stop. Facebook et al is not the real world, nor is the real world the real world. I spent years in high-school trying to define friendship, only to come to the conclusion that it is very contextual, and, like marriage, requires a lot of work. In the end, my friends became my family, and everyone else my friends. Why try to figure it out, are we in high-school again?

[Jeremiah Owyang]

Great stuff as always Steve, love the new pic.

[Gino Tocchetti (metakappa)]

in the virtual life, play the new "virtual" game, not the old "real" version

what I mean when I consider a Facebook member a "Facebook friend" ? what is the game I want to play here ? Simply, I like to involve people more, better and in easier way, in those things Facebook makes possible.

Are my "Facebook friends" also real-life friends ? No. Maybe. The question itself is not proper: in Facebook I have the opportunity to play a different game about friendship, not possible before. I don't want to be limited to replicate that in the real life. I'm not interested in a camparison with the real life, still running elsewhere. I'm interested in the opportunities Facebook is giving to me, not in forcing Facebook to give what I already have.

[Dennis McDonald]

Technology lets us develop and manage relationships with more people. It also lets us discover and develop more relationships that fall under the classical "friends" definitions. What the different networks call them is just confusing. But I do know that the technology has enabled me to develop friendships with people I've never met face to face. But that's not the same as what Facebook calls a "friend."

[simplerich]

The whole dilution of the meaning of friend is I think in response to the lack of a word to describe "Someone whose blog I read that I'd like others to know I have some vague numinous association with" on facebook. I don't think 'friend' is the right word for it but I don't know what the right word would be.

Because I believe words actually mean something I don't go adding everybody that comes around to my friends list on there. I have to have had some interaction beyond commenting on blogs to count them as 'friend-worthy' but it's less than what would constitute a friend in real life.

There needs to be another word.

[John Whiteside]

I was thinking about this after my earlier comment and something struck me: there are a few people I know who are, I would say, masters of social networks. They have solid networks with a diverse range of people in them who will go out of their way to help them professionally and personally. They know who these people are and they put effort into maintaining their networks.

None of them make much use of Web 2.0 social networking tools. At least one of them uses a physical address book.

For all the hoopla about online social networking, I'm not sure that it really gives any better, more useful networks; just bigger ones.

[Kevin Gamble]

You really need to read the study that you site in the Wikipedia article. A friend is not anything like a confidant. That the study is being reported the way it is in not in the least bit accurate.

I actually think that going to fewer confidants is a positive. It is not at all a good thing for too many people to know your most deep secrets. Perhaps the better connectedness that we are experiencing now is contributing to that trend. It is in no way a given that this trend is a negative and not a positive, however.

[Joe Buhler]

Social networks like Facebook and LinkedIn remind me more and more of the old business card collection and rolodex - yes, there was a time when those existed - of course, with more functionality added like photos and the capability to add other detailed information, but in most cases it has nothing to do with friendship more with "enhanced" business contact. This might not be true for the original college users of Facebook but seems to me the case for the new fast growing category of business users.

[Chris Brogan...]

Huh. Before reading your quote of the American Heritage Dictionary, I'd have said that the term "friend" was troublesome. I think Pownce was kind to add the "fans" term in there. Because as it stands, there are a few categories of people I connect to/with in this universe: people I really know and love; people I admire and appreciate professionally; and people who have chosen to connect to me, but that I don't know especially well.

That last category is the tricker. But comrade seems fair. These people dig my stuff, or they like how I fill space. For whatever reason, they've asked to connect and come along for the ride. That seems reasonable to call them comrades, right?

So thanks, Steve. You've changed my thinking on the term "friend."

[edward]

The Internet as a Platform Will Continuously Evolve

Mark Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, an NBA franchise, and Chairman of HDNet, the richest blogger in the world claims The Internet is Dean and Boring days ago in his blog. Why? Here is his reason: Every new technological, mechanical or intellectual breakthrough has its day, days, months and years. But they don’t rule forever. That’s the reality… Just like wheels, printing presses, cars, TV, radio, electricity, water…Its very difficult to develop applications on a platform that is ever changing…

Well, Mark Cuban draws a wrong conclusion though his observations are right. Why?

1. The slow adoption of high-speed broadband during past 5 years in the US is not a problem of the Internet, or the proof of the Internet innovation stalls, it is a matter of domestic policy issues

2. From Web 1.0 to Web 2.0, the Internet has demonstrated its continuous evolution as a great platform in endorsing lot of application-level innovations, such as Wiki, Blog, Social Networking, Podcast, just to name a few

3. The continuously evolving of the Internet is good instead of bad, actually the innovation of the Internet itself is not fast enough, and that is why we call for Internet 2.0 to serve upcoming Web 3.0 better

Frontier Blog - search but not REsearch
http://www.hwswworld.com/wp

[Josh Bernoff]

Facebook friends are not necessarily friends, any more than email is "correspondence" or your second life avatar is really you.

[Robert Scoble]

Steve: I just posted a response to you. The eight ways you can be my Facebook friend (or enemy): http://scobleizer.com/2007/08/28/the-eight-ways-you-can-be-my-friend-or-enemy-online/

[VaXzine]

FACE THIS--> Everyone's best friend is their computer.

[Darcy Kelley]

Personally, I haven't heard Marketing Director “A” say (s)he is better than Marketing Director “B” because “A” has more friends than “B” on Facebook, LinkedIn, Plaxo, etc. Steve, I am concerned that tweens and teens, specifically, have developed this equivalency: that more friends, views, ratings – on a social network – equates to a better person.

What is damaging to the civil society – symbolic friendships. Consider people that have hundreds, or thousands, of friends, but don’t communicate with most of them. The appearance of friendship that doesn’t really exist is more ambiguous. Social networks have not created this phenomenon – they have just amplified it. The old “Christmas card list” used to be the ‘punch line’ that symbolized a crock-pot of aggregated, tenuous associations that were activated only once a year, and fleetingly.

Like I said, I’m more concerned for the young folks. Social scientists have sounded alarm bells about “socially maladjusted” children who have pursued increasing e-friendships (for that sake, only) at the expense of developing interpersonal and cognitive skills. The Japanese word “otaku” used to refer to anime geeks, however I think we’re at a tipping point where the phenomenon is finding a parallel for many young people on social networks.

[Clair]

The use of the word "friend" is changing and I think that it's probably because technology has helped us cross borders and find real friends even in far away places and at the same time. And along with that is the dilemma that social networks bring to us: Shall we consider everyone we're connected to as friends?

In some ways, Facebook is vague on the way it uses the word "friend" but at the same time, you could choose to give confirmation details which would clarify the kind of relationship you have with someone you added as a friend on it.

[NakedBiff]

Hey Steve,

This is a subject we talk about here at Naked ALL THE TIME and I can see from the amount of comments it is something that a lot of people think (or at least have something to say) about!

What I've been thinking though is that it's the way social networks and messaging run the way they do that makes us question the meaning of the term 'friend'. As 2.0 evolves into 3.0 under our feet (and maybe our heads), and as the word 'open' appears in more and more conversations and product propositions, the way the friends list works with and for us by representing closeness and intimacy, hence clearing up any confusion over the different relationships we have with friends and/or followers.

~biff~

[Joanie]

Let my start by saying I really enjoyed the reading. Nice piece.
I've been thinking about it myself lately, wondering if I should remove some of my FB friends.
I don't use Myspace anymore due to the friends overload and I'd hate to see it happen to FB as well.
My way of dealing with this issue is by using 8hands.
It's a social aggregator that calculates your friends from all networks and rank them by amount of correspondence. This desktop tool keeps me posted on who are my real "friends".
It works for now, but I'm still worried about my FB future.
What do you think? should I delete some of my FB friends?

[E Gordon]

Joseph Epstein (U of Chicago) has a recent book titled "Friendship." It features his usual insightful and funny essays.

[Hans Peter Brondmo]

Great post! The distinction between the noun "friend" and the verb "friend" is key. Mike is right to point out that being a friend on MySpace does not signify friendship. My Facebook friends are not necessarily my terrestrial friends. They are just people I friended.

The main problem, as I see it, and as has been discussed above, is that we're dealing with a one-size-fits-all model. We need types or classifications of friends. I posted some more thoughts on this here: What it means to friend.

[Jeremy Pepper]

A friend is someone that shows up at your funeral. How many of these "friends" of yours do you think will do that?

[Trevor Ginn]

I think that friendship has stayed the same, we have just developed a better way of staying in touch with acquantances, people who we would have lost touch with, we can now never loose!

[DM]

I cancelled both my myspace and facebook accounts and you wouldn't believe the backlash that I received. People were worried!

I think that defining friendship is a difficult thing because it manifests in so many different degrees. I liked facebook for the ability to reconnect with people with whom I had been friends (in realy life) and who continue to do cool things - there is the chance there that we might collaborate on a project or simply reignite a friendship at some point now that we are back in touch. On the other hand, you can reconnect with a past casual acquaintance who is less a friend and more a peer, and end up knowing a great amount about the life of someone with whom you never communicate, which is scary and creates an artificial connection.

There is a balance to be struck. Clearly, I didn't find that balance. I need to reevaluate my participation in these social networks :)

[oyunlar]

The eight ways you can be my Facebook friend (or enemy): http://scobleizer.com/2007/08/28/the-eight-ways-you-can-be-my-friend-or-enemy-online/

oyunlar

youtube

videosayfan.com