Slashdot Mirror
Social Side-Effects Of Internet Use
venicebeach writes "The World Internet Project has released its third annual report on internet usage. It contains few surprises, but lots of interesing stats - for example the most experienced internet users spend an average of 15.8 hours online per week. CNN is running a story on the social findings - "New study shatters Internet 'geek' image." Apparently they are suprised to hear that internet users are more social than non-users: internet users watch less television, read more books and engage in more social activities."
Considering that the average American watches four hours of television per day, I'm not sure the average person has much time left for socializing. Anything that reduces the amount of TV watched, including using the Internet, is likely to improve how social that person is.
That's more like my daily Internet use :-)
/.er is in?
I wonder what percentile the average
John.
Amateurs! I know people who are on for longer than 15.8 hours per day!
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
internet users watch less television, read more books and engage in more social activities.
Next week, we'll hear that it's recently been discovered that internet users simply lie for the purposes of polls and statistics more than non-users do, and those that don't lie outright simply know how to crack the World Internet Project's records and alter their annual reports to be more favorable to the 'net-bound...
"Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
The credibility of information published on the Internet also received a surprising boost.
Despite the existence of countless spoof Web sites and message boards that carry oddball political rants, more than half of Internet users surveyed said "most or all" of the information they find online is reliable and credible.
New medium, same gullibility.
Sent from your iPad.
I got a wife and kid now. :)
Met my wife on IRC 6 years ago. We now have our first kid and have been married 3.5 years.
And I probably spend 10 hours a day online. :P
Sugapablo
How is this a troll? I'd say it certainly qualifies as a "Social Side-Effect Of Internet Use".
do D&D sessions count as social gatherings, cuz if so then sure, this works.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
I watch less than 1 hour of TV per week. Unless I or my wife are not feeling well. Then it goes up to an hour or two per day.
Most of the rest of the time we are working, sleeping, cleaning the house (laundry etc), hanging out with friends, reading books, watching movies, pusuing a hobby or playing games.
The Internet gives us the content we want, when we want it, where we want it. TV just can't do that.
42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
I used to be an anti-social geek until I discovered the internet. Upon discovering how easy it is to communicate with people when not face to face, I learned to like people and interact with them. I was able to hide any apprehension, and by subverting this I gained real confidence in myself. This of course translated over well to the real world, and now I consider myself a people person. And no one thinks I am a geek. So this article comes as no surprise to me, and I'm sure that I'm not the only person in this boat.
I would be really interested to see a study seeking to find a link between internet usage and awareness/involvement in current events.
Many of my friends who aren't on the internet very much are always asking me what's going on in the world. Though I am not sure if it is internet users or memigo users.
-Jackson
If the 'most experienced' internet users spend an average of 15.8 hours a week online, what the hell does that make me? (Most Experienced)?
Mostly this article just reinforces what I already knew about myself and my online associates. Honestly, the whole geek image has been one of stereotype since the beginning. Not everyone who uses computers and goes online frequently has thick glasses and no girlfriend, sitting around playing EverQuest all day. (This isn't an attack on EQ players, I am one.)
Most of my friends who can be found sitting behind their computer all day watch little to no television, and spend a great deal of their time reading (I personally find e-books easier to read than real books, and do so often.) I would say the internet is a far better medium to immerse yourself in than television or radio.
Who is really going to answer 'I sit unwashed in a darkened room masturbating and hitting refresh entirely too often.'
P.S. Reading books is not a social activity. What exactly are these unspecified 'social activities?' Is posting to message boards considered 'social.'
"internet users watch less television,"
Download the episodes...
"read more books"
And/or lots of Linux docs...
"and engage in more social activities"
Do LAN Parties count?
Who doesn't like free music?
Unlike TV, you have to at least be able to READ to get much out of the Internet. :)
the most experienced internet users spend an average of 15.8 hours online per week
I read "offline" the first time. I thought it was an okay average...
And actualy, I think the it's the time we spend offline that socialy affects us. I mean, how can your friends contact you if you're not on MSN??
You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
I watch very little tv (no pre-set shows i watch/like)
I read books often (1 every month or so)
I only "go out" on weekends
I spend the majority of my time at work chatting online and surfing the net, then I come home and play FFXI.
Why should I go outside? I get hay fever or cold or could get in an accident. It's not warm enough to use the pool yet, and the jacuzzi is nice, but I get cold when I get out.
I think i'll just stay in and continue my life.
Ave Molech Setting
This is the same effect that has been discussed here often. Heavy internet users are likely to be people who are interested in life. They want to learn, do new things, try new things, know how things work..
The article is not clear about it, but I would guess they did not adjust for Socio-Economic Segments (SES). SES would reflect mainly an individual's income and education level.
Internet usage of course begun in the higher SES levels (having started mainly in the academic world) -- and has ever since penetrated more the top levels than the bottom ones (this has in turn given risen to the term digital divide). On the other hand, guess which SES reads more books and has a richer social experience ?
Quem a paca cara compra, paca cara pagará.
Yeah, I am in the same ball-park.
16hrs per day (sitting in front of a PC)
= 112hrs/week
I wonder if that includes all the remote boxes I have going at once.
4 SSH sessions to other servers running 24x7
2-3 ftp sessions d'loading shareware ~ 12 hrs/day
NewsBin D'loading newsgroups = 24x7
BitTorrent = 24x7 (x 3 computers)
email client is running 24x7
various coding and design stuff = 4hrs/day
All total I am responsible for 232Hrs/day of computer use. Man, I need a nap. =)
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
... because I have a speech impediment so I can't communicate verbally very well. Internet and BBS were a big welcome to my life. I rarely even use telephones and don't need TDD devices anymore.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I get so tired of this assumption that just because a person reads a lot, they are automatically more intelligent. I happen to read quite a bit, but I know people who spend way more time than most people watching TV, yet are very intelligent. Specifically, I know of a college professor that could out debate anyone on Crossfire, and does nothing all evening but watch History and PBS.
Also, what's with the assumption that any reading material is automatically more valuable than any television show? I can learn more watching 30 minutes of TLC, Discovery, A&E, Biography, History Channel, or PBS than I can in spending three hours reading whatever trash Oprah is recommending this week. I do agree that reading increases vocabulary, but I would also argue that television is much more conducive to other areas of learning, as it delivers its message via sight and sound.
As for the social aspect, many of us are forced into social situations all day long. We do not need to spend our times outside of the office, carpool, school, college, whatever to increase our social skills. However, we do need "alone time" so that we can regroup and prepare for the next day.
Public use of any portable music system is a virtually guaranteed indicator of sociopathic tendencies. -- Zoso
De novo, given the penetration of the Net into most of the countries surveyed, I'd say the results as presented would mean nothing.
... will transform our social, political and economic lives"), I'd say the results mean even LESS than nothing. I doubt such a group would put out a study saying "heavy net users are social outcasts".
But given that the survey comes from an Internet advocacy group (from their site : "the originators of this project believe that the Internet
- it's nearly obvious that a person who spends 15 hours on the Net a week would spend less time watching TV - if only because that person has less hours in his day to do so. Let me see TV-watching statistics as a proportion of free time NOT spent on the Net.
- it's also obvious that Net users are more affluent, which correlates strongly with having better paying jobs and with having higher education levels, just like say, owning a BMW. So it's more likely they're going to spend more time reading, because i) they're more likely to be literate, ii) they're more likely to need to read as a function of their work. Let me see what Net usage looks like for owners of different cars, and then let's argue about what these statistics mean.
- because of an nearly implied level of affluence, people who can afford a Net connection are also likely to have more leisure time in general than non-Net users. It's hard to be out there socializing when you're a blue-collar joe working two jobs to make ends meet for your family of six. Do you think such a person spends much time on the Net ?
This study is useless as presented, and I frankly don't believe it. Just look at all the TV-related love-ins (Farscape/Tivo/STTNG/Futurama/etc.) here and ask whether you really believe Net users watch more TV ON AN ADJUSTED BASIS than non-Net users. The problem is that specification of a Net user is confounded with all sorts of variables.
What I want to see are numbers that show hours of "social" activity related to leisure hours NOT SPENT ON THE INTERNET. I bet they'd tell a different story. I'd bet that heavy Net users spend FAR less time doing socializing/exercising/being outside than people who use the Net moderately or less.
John Bender: So it's social then. Pathetic and sad... but social.
How much more popular radio was with experinced users than non users, in almost every case, radio was much more commonly used, more important to older (been online a long time not age) interent users than noobs. Either the old guard loves Rush, or it's just something that doesn't require eyes, but that is odd. Who'd have thought that an older technology would benefit from the rapid adoption of a newer one leaving the middle tech aced out.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
Apparently they are suprised to hear that internet users are more social than non-users: internet users watch less television, read more books and engage in more social activities."
That's because I can find out anything RIGHT now by clickety clicking....rather that sitting in front of my TV and listening to the sound bite commercials from the news channells all night waiting to "find out at 10..."
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Does that count as being online 168 hours a week?
If Im working on some programming project for, say a 4 hour streach, and Im flipping back and forth to a browser pointed at some online documentation, does that count as 4 hours online? Or (pulling a number out of my ass) is only 10% of that online?