In the video Visitors and Residents, speaker Dave White discusses the Visitors and Residents principle, which outlines several ideas about the motivation behind users of the world wide web--especially concerning social media technologies common to Web 2.0.
The Principle:
The main idea behind Dave White’s Visitors and Residents principle is that visitors see the Web 2.0 technologies as a set of tools to use while residents see the web as a kind of space in which to inhabit, socialize, and generally maintain a digital identity. In referencing users who would be considered visitors, White states, “They go online. They do what they need to do. They come away again. They leave no trace. They have got no social persona online.” Residents, on the other hand, see the web as a digital extension of their non-virtual existence. They “live out a portion of their life online. They have a kind of form of their identify which stays out there online even when they log off,” states White.
One point that White makes that I think is very important is that a “Lack of engagement is not an age- or skill-based distinction,” but rather more of an issue of motivation. This is important because it identifies that the Visitor and Resident roles are not defined based on technical skill.
My Reaction:
I think much of what White is saying is fascinating. In quotes like the following, White is able to better describe my online behavior than I myself could:
The visitor will critically assess as to whether the platform that they are going to use is actually going to solve a problem for them or move them forward in a goal that they are trying to achieve. Now, if they decide that it does, they will learn it. So, the visitor is no more or less technically adept than the resident. They’re just more focused in trying to achieve particular ends.
Much like the quote describes, I typically see online activities as a means to an end, and I am not often interested in new programs or platforms unless I see an immediate need or problem that they will help me resolve.
This is one of the reasons that I’ve struggled with adopting Twitter. As White says, “An awful lot of material that floats around social media spaces is enormously banal,” and this is how I feel about the content on Twitter.
Although I respect the platform and the way that others use it--both academically and for entertainment value--I have not seen even the faintest hint of a need for me to start involving myself with the platform until just recently.
Where I See Myself On The Continuum:
If we are going by White’s definition of visitors and residents, then I land very far down the Visitor side of the continuum--VERY far. Previously, I have had no desire to maintain an online persona, and I’ve been happy to leave my digital identity behind when I log off. However, I do enjoy using technology very much, and I am happy to utilize it as a tool when I have a goal to accomplish.
While I can agree somewhat with White’s idea concerning how one maintains one’s persona online, I am not sure how I feel about how he is using the term “identity”. As a person who likes to create things--including art, music, and writing--I consider a large part of my identity to be embedded and infused within the things I create. When I do share these things, I do not share them to maintain the status of my persona on top of a heap of other shared items and documents. Rather, I share them because I want the user or viewer to have an experience. I do not know where this kind of activity places me on the Visitor and Resident continuum.
In a sense, the Visitor and Resident continuum is only a very limited tool in making sense of this greater issue, and White does mention that this is a very binary approach. I think there is much more to explore with this concept, but, overall, the Visitor and Resident principle is fascinating and has many immediate applications to how I interact with the web on a day-to-day basis. I hope to explore more about this principle in the near future.
D White. (2013, May 31). Visitors and Residents [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sFBadv04eY
The Principle:
The main idea behind Dave White’s Visitors and Residents principle is that visitors see the Web 2.0 technologies as a set of tools to use while residents see the web as a kind of space in which to inhabit, socialize, and generally maintain a digital identity. In referencing users who would be considered visitors, White states, “They go online. They do what they need to do. They come away again. They leave no trace. They have got no social persona online.” Residents, on the other hand, see the web as a digital extension of their non-virtual existence. They “live out a portion of their life online. They have a kind of form of their identify which stays out there online even when they log off,” states White.
One point that White makes that I think is very important is that a “Lack of engagement is not an age- or skill-based distinction,” but rather more of an issue of motivation. This is important because it identifies that the Visitor and Resident roles are not defined based on technical skill.
My Reaction:
I think much of what White is saying is fascinating. In quotes like the following, White is able to better describe my online behavior than I myself could:
The visitor will critically assess as to whether the platform that they are going to use is actually going to solve a problem for them or move them forward in a goal that they are trying to achieve. Now, if they decide that it does, they will learn it. So, the visitor is no more or less technically adept than the resident. They’re just more focused in trying to achieve particular ends.
Much like the quote describes, I typically see online activities as a means to an end, and I am not often interested in new programs or platforms unless I see an immediate need or problem that they will help me resolve.
This is one of the reasons that I’ve struggled with adopting Twitter. As White says, “An awful lot of material that floats around social media spaces is enormously banal,” and this is how I feel about the content on Twitter.
Although I respect the platform and the way that others use it--both academically and for entertainment value--I have not seen even the faintest hint of a need for me to start involving myself with the platform until just recently.
Where I See Myself On The Continuum:
If we are going by White’s definition of visitors and residents, then I land very far down the Visitor side of the continuum--VERY far. Previously, I have had no desire to maintain an online persona, and I’ve been happy to leave my digital identity behind when I log off. However, I do enjoy using technology very much, and I am happy to utilize it as a tool when I have a goal to accomplish.
While I can agree somewhat with White’s idea concerning how one maintains one’s persona online, I am not sure how I feel about how he is using the term “identity”. As a person who likes to create things--including art, music, and writing--I consider a large part of my identity to be embedded and infused within the things I create. When I do share these things, I do not share them to maintain the status of my persona on top of a heap of other shared items and documents. Rather, I share them because I want the user or viewer to have an experience. I do not know where this kind of activity places me on the Visitor and Resident continuum.
In a sense, the Visitor and Resident continuum is only a very limited tool in making sense of this greater issue, and White does mention that this is a very binary approach. I think there is much more to explore with this concept, but, overall, the Visitor and Resident principle is fascinating and has many immediate applications to how I interact with the web on a day-to-day basis. I hope to explore more about this principle in the near future.
D White. (2013, May 31). Visitors and Residents [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sFBadv04eY