Because the respondents in this study are active SNS users, they are constantly engaged in a hoard of actvities related to SNS, ranging from photo uploading and sharing, status updates, information sharing, status commenting as well as giving and receiving ―like‖. This is seen as one of the ways in which digital identity is constructed and maintained. In this process however, they are also faced with digital others who may disrupt their digital performance
67 from time to time. This paper discusses two ways in which these youths see their digital identity and two strategies adopted by these youths to overcome disruptions.
3.1 “The True Me” vs. “The Formal Me”
One of the recurring themes from the analysis is the issue of how they portray themselves on the various SNS they own and how they want the digital others in the specific SNS to see them. This is best examplified by 21 year old Arief. He explained that he presented himself in the ―most formal way I could‖ on his Facebook account, but was quick to add that ―but that is not the true me‖. It is in his Instagram account that he presented the ―true‖ him—as someone who is out and about having fun and enjoying life. All the 20 respondents were aware of the different way they presented themselves on Facebook and Instagram. In fact, they had chosen to do so. At the same time, none of them see this as a form of deception or a creation of new identity, as aptly put by 20 year old Susan: ―both (her identities on Facebook and Instagram) are me...but to different people‖.
As most of the youths in this study started out with Facebook first and then Instagram, they admitted that they were more selective of their Instagram followers. This is in order to maintain the digital identity that is closest to their ―true self‖. They do not want to repeat the ―mistakes‖ of accepting ―just about anybody‖ like that they did on Facebook. Thus, while maintaining their Facebook accounts, they see Facebook as a site where a more composed and formal digital identity is portrayed.
3.2 Multiple Digital Identities, Multiple Digital Others, One “Collapsed Context”
Consider the following excerpt from one the most expressive respondents in the study, a 21- year old female university student who described herself as ―not the normal university student you know‖. She related a weekend get-away in Kuala Lumpur where ―I had to update my Facebook since my parents know I do that regularly. So I had to post pictures of myself throughout my weekend stay...Of course these are ―good‖ pictures of me, the way my parents want to see me...I had some pictures of that party on my Instagram though...‖
Related to the above discussions on ―true me vs. formal me‖ is the issue of how the respondents portray themselves digitally on their SNS. Especially in the case of Facebook, like Nurul, the youths in my study came to the realization that as far as digital identity is concerned, it is not the case of one digital identity fits all digital others. These youths were faced with an onslaught of definitions of who they are by their many digital others. Outside the context of SNS, these digital others have very specific roles in the lives of these youths, i.e. uncles, fathers, high school friends, teachers. Similarly for the youths who are, for example, a niece, daughter, high school friend and student, to their digital others offline. Their digital others‘ definitions of who these youths are, or what their roles are, are very much entreched in the ―real world‖—it is specific, it is almost always singular and it is quite fixed. SNS made it difficult as there is only one context where all these roles and identities were collapsed. Thus, the digital identity of these youths are multi-sided with multi-roles presented to many different digital others who know them differently in different passages of their lives.
3.3 Strategies to Eliminate Disruption 1: Goodbye My “Friend”
68 Cassandra, ―clean up my long list of friends every now and then‖. Digital others who were dropped off their friends‘ list are those who do not observe the etiquette of online interaction, thus disrupting the youths‘ digital performance. Additionally, those who were just there but did not make any impact to youths were also eliminated. This strategy is often applied to acquaintances who they have accumulated over time as their online friends and followers, but became problematic when put together in the same context with their other ―friends‖ and ―followers‖. Nevertheless, this strategy comes with a price, usually paid offline. Mei Yun (23 year old student) reported that her aunt was ―unhappy and offended‖ when she was removed from her Facebook page, expressing her feelings many times during their offline interactions. 3.4 Strategies to Eliminate Disruption 2: Become the Observer, Not the Observed Another strategy worth mentioning is to remain inactive, and this is especially true in the case of Facebook. Online activities such as sharing of postings, commenting on digital others‘ posts and statuses as well as posting pictures are kept to the minimum. However, despite this low level of digital presence, the youths in this study admitted that they still check on their Facebook feeds in order ―to know what friends are up to‖. In this sense, they take the role of the observer and refused to be observed. This in turn points to the importance of maintaining SNS accounts, especially Facebook, in their daily routines. With this strategy, the chances of their digital identity being misunderstood by their many digital others are kept in check. 4. Conclusion
Social relations are maintained through interaction. In the case of offline interactions, contexts—such as work place, family setting, public space—are important in giving some sort of structure and social cues. Additionally, it is through context that one identity is made clear to the others. Characterized by what has been termed as a ―collapsed context‖, online interactions on SNS are multi-dimensional with multi-roles and multi-identities at play in one context. Going back to the question posed earlier on why youths have more than one SNS accounts, this particular characteristics of SNS posed a problem to these youths as they tried to juggle with their many digital identities. Just like their counterparts in other counties, the youths in this study do not use SNS to experiment and create a new identity. Their digital identity feed from their offline identity. Similarly, their digital others are people they have contact with offline, at one point or another of their lives.
While Facebook and Instagram remain popular and relevant for many youths for socializing as well as a source of information and education, youths will migrate to other SNS that offer easier option in managing and maintaining their digital identity. Whatsapp and WeChat are two examples cited by many of the youths in this study. While Facebook and Instagram started out as a platform for socializing, it remains to be seen as to whether the users will continue to use these SNS for that purpose given the complications of maintaining various digital identities.
5. Acknowledgement
The author wishes to note her acknowledgment to Universiti Sains Malaysia for the funding of this research project under the USM Short Term Research Grant P4360.
69 6. References
Adam Mahamat Helou, Nor Zairah Ab. Rahim and Oye, N.D., 2012. Students‘ perceptions on social networking sites influence on academic performance. International Journal of Social Networking and Virtual Communities, 1(1), pp.7-15.
Bailenson, J.N., Blascovich, J., Beall, A.C. and J. Loomis, J., 2001. Equilibrium revisited: mutual gaze and personal space in virtual environment. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 10, pp.583-598.
Bailenson, J.N., Blascovic, J., and Guadagno, R.E., 2008. Self-Representations in immersive virtual environment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(11), pp.2673-2690. Barash, V., Ducheneaut, N., Issacs, E. and Bellotti, V., 2010. Faceplant: impression
(mis)management in facebook status updates. In: Proceedings of 4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). Washington DC, USA, 23- 26 May 2010. Washington DC: USA.
Bargh, J.A., McKenna, K.Y.A. and Fitzsimons, G.M., 2002. Can you see the real me? activation and expression of the ―true self‖ on the internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58 (1), pp.33-48.
boyd, D., 2001. Faceted Id/Entity: Managing representation in a digital world. MA. Brown University, [online] Available at: < www.danah.org/papers/Thesis.FacetedIdentity.pdf> [Accessed 15 May 2014].
boyd, D., 2007. Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In: D. Buckingham, ed. 2007. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning—Youth, Identity, and Digital Volume. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pp.1-26.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., and Lampe, C., 2007. The benefits of Facebook ―friends‖: social capital and college students‘ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 12, pp.1143-1168.
Gatson, S.N., 2011. Self-naming practices on the internet: Identity, authenticity, and community. Cultural Studies Critical Methodologies, 11(3), pp.224-235.
Giddens, A., 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late-Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Goffman, E., 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books.
Gomes, J., 2014. Social media impact on Malaysia‘s 13th General Election. Asia Pacific Media Educator, 24(1), pp.95-105.
Joinson, A.N., 2008. ‗Looking up‘ or ‗keeping up with‘ people? motives and uses of Facebook. In: Proceedings of CHI Online Social Networks. Florence, Italy, 5-10 April 2008. Florence: Italy.
Joseph Sipalan., 2013. Report: Malaysian youths fourth most active internet users. Malay
Mail, [online]12 October. Available at:
<www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/report-malaysian-youths-fourth-most- active-internet-users-globally> [Accessed 18 August 2015].
Lang, N., 2015. A teen on why teens are abandoning Facebook. The Daily Dot, [online]19 February. Available at: <www.dailydot.com/opinion/why-teens-are-leaving-facebook/> [Accessed 18 August 2015].
Livingstone, S., 2005. Mediating the public/private boundary at home: children‘s use of the internet for privacy and participation, [online] Available at: <http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/archive/00000506> [Accessed 10 June 2014].
Mohd Azizuddin Mohd Sani., 2014. The social media election in Malaysia: the 13th General Election in 2013. Kajian Malaysia, 32(2), pp.123-147.
70 Norni Mahadi., 2013. 13.3 million Malaysians are facebook users. Borneo Post [online] 16 June. Available at: <www.theborneopost.com/2013/06/16/13-3-million-msians-are- facebook-users> [Accessed 6 April 2014]
Norsiah Abdul Hamid, Mohd. Sobhi Ishak, Syamsul Anuar Ismail and Siti Syamsul Nurin Mohmad Yazam., 2013. Social media usage among university students in Malaysia. In: B. Patrut, Patrut M. and Cmecia C. eds. 2013. Social Media and the New Academic Environment: Pedagogical Challenges. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Weiss, M.L., 2012. Politics in Cyberspace: New Media in Malaysia. Berlin: fesmedia Asia. Zhao, S., Grasmuck S. and Martin, J., 2008. Identity constuction on facebook: digital
empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), pp.1816-1836.
71