Religion-in-the-age-of-the-internet
Antonio Mencía, “La religión en tiempos de las redes sociales: historia, oportunidad y retos”
Religion is called upon not only to make use of social networking sites to spread the Gospel message, but also to integrate that message into this new culture
Until a few years ago, the most common use of the Internet was to look around to get information. Nowadays, hardly do people use the World Wide Web only for that purpose.
Recently, the Media Relations Office of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) announced the start of its presence in one of the more widely known social networking sites, Twitter, with the objective of making known its press communiqués and its other contents.
Prior to that, the same office of Media Relations had put in motion a blog which, apart from providing information, has made possible debates on the most pressing issues, such as objection of conscience, sexual abuse on the part of some clergy, or the appointment of certain Cardinals to the South American Union.
Last 19th May 2009, the Pontifical Council for Social Communications of the Vatican announced the launch of a Facebook Application entitled: The Pope meets you on Facebook. It is integrated into the site www.pope2you.net, which permits exchanging postcards of Benedict XVI and sending excerpts of his speeches, talks, homilies, and thoughts of the Pope within the social networking site. “The cards can be sent to one’s ‘friends’ in Facebook and the application can be shared with whoever. This way, we can create a broad communication network around our Holy Father”, says the opening lines of Pope2You, from which one could also directly send such texts and postcards.
The Internet of today is more and more a participation space. Sites such as Facebook, MySpace, Hi5, InterNation, Tuenti, or Twitter itself, are realities whose presence is obvious in the lives of millions of people who have turned them into a ‘place’ in which to get together daily, and likewise into an ordinary means of communication.
This initiative of the USCCB Office of Media Relations and the very presence of the Pope on Facebook show how modern platforms do not exclude the possibility of the Catholic religion making full use of them in order to carry out more effectively its task of evangelization.
Certainly, these are not unique cases nor are they the only initiatives that are specifically Catholic. Many other groups are taking advantage of these social networking sites to promote themselves and even to recruit new collaborators.
Granted that this reality is widely popular, it nevertheless does not cease to provoke both those who are not tech-oriented and those who habitually use them. Why are they called social networking sites and what is their historical origin? What characteristics do they have? What opportunities do they provide and what concrete challenges do they present? How are religious groups —specifically the Catholics— taking advantage of them and what results and problems are showing up?
1. History
A social networking site is an Internet site which allows individuals to build a public or semi-public profile within the limits of the platform offered by the service. “It is made up of a group of persons linked, generally, by common interests, open to sharing thoughts, as well as sharing bits and pieces of their lives: from links that they consider significant to photos or their own personal videos […] These social sites are composed of common people —not exactly the techie ones or the experts—, who distribute content related to their own interests or existence.”
Presently, there is a wide variety of social sites with characteristics that depend on the various technological possibilities and interests of the users. In essence, they would typically include a more or less visible profile where the identity of the person is revealed (through one or several photos), normally on the basis of a prior survey using the same platform of the service provider. It’s not just mere text that can be uploaded: one can load photos, news, music archives, personal videos: all these make up the basic structure of the so-called social networking sites.
Social sites are encompassed within the more well-known terms such as Web 2.0, a term coined in 2004 which underlines the technical difference that sets it apart from the so-called Web 2.1 which predominated previously.
What is the difference? “The change in tools of programming and of the technologies in use, including of course the bandwidth and, thus, the speed of internet traffic flow, and the improvement in I.T. equipment […] Previously, the internaut was a mere receiver of content; but now, he is an interactive user.
The historical origin of these social networking sites can be traced back to 1994-95 when some Internet sites, with the technical capacity of those times (and in which the environment was a bit restricted) provided the opportunity to add comments to Forums, instant messaging, and eventually, Friends’ Lists.
The first ever social networking site, SixDegrees, came out in 1997: it permitted not only the creation of personal profiles but also lists of friends and, the following year, the ability to navigate/search through one’s friends’ lists.
From 1997 to 2001, this technological evolution enabled new tools to put such websites as LiveJournal or the Swedish LunaStorm at the forefront as well as to get users much more involved. The death-blow came when Ryze.com in 2001 gave a push to commercial websites on the Internet. A year later, Friendster came to the fore: it was a place for setting meetings and was so wildly successful that its popularity also caused its decline, as technical problems couldn’t catch up with the high demand for its services.
Taking advantage of the difficulties of Friendster, Tom Anderson undertook in 2003 a project which was hardly noticed at the start: he gave it the name MySpace. Months later —this was already 2004—, a young Psychology student from Harvard University, the 24-year-old Mark Zuckerber, launched a project to put online the registration info of those enrolled at the University. That was the seed of what we now know to be Facebook.
The Facebook phenomenon gave way to the development, consolidation, diffusion and proliferation of many more social networking sites in the months and years that followed. Orkut became the first of Brazil and became a hit in India; Mixi spread throughout Japan; LunaStorm consolidated itself within the Scandinavian region; Holland embraced Hyves and Gronó made itself felt in Poland; Hi5 became a success in Latin America and some European countries; Bebo took over Great Britain, New Zealand and Australia; QQ went en masse in China and, more recently, Tuenti conquered Spain. At present, almost all mobile phone operators are equipped to be connected to these social networking sites.
This brief historical review of the times and names that have been crucial in the evolution of tools facilitating the rapid development of social sites —of the Internet in general— leads us to a deeper consideration: those needs that these platforms have responded to.
The popularity of social networking sites “responds to the fundamental desire of people to enter into a relationship with the others […] It is an eagerness for communication and friendship which has its root in our very human nature and cannot be understood simply as a response to technological innovations”. In this sense, the desire to be in touch and the instinct of communication are, in the end, modern manifestations of that intrinsic tendency of all human beings to go beyond themselves.
This entire social sites development offers us a whole gamut of opportunities to do good and to grow through it. And for those who have religious objectives, they have the perfect opportunity for an even bigger capillary action, apart from the benefits already being derived. But the same social networking sites likewise present ethical challenges which cannot be ignored.
2. Opportunities
In 2006, MyChurch.org set off the profession of religions via the social networking sites. Thereafter, other initiatives came in: Gospelr.com, Xianz, GodKut and, just lately, Catholic sites such as 4marks.com, Cathcommunity.org, Xt3.com, Catolink and Pope2you.net.
But Catholic initiatives via social networking sites have not necessarily been limited to those that are enabled by new platforms that are directed towards specific audiences and, thus, are restricted in their specific reach. The actual presence of Priests, religious, and believers in non-sectarian social networking sites such as Facebook or MySpace has not been insignificant. Many people make public their Catholic religious identity through their personal profiles so that other people can establish contact for promoting specific projects, share initiatives and folders, or create groups of fans of Saints, Blesseds or religious leaders, taking off from this prior knowledge.
Parish Priests who have taken advantage of these digital tools in order to publish real events in their Shrine or Parish have not been few; neither are those faithful who have set up groups for their Parish or for apostolic movements.
In the article The Facebook Phenomenon, Father Antonio Spadaro, O.P., reflects better this Christian presence in this way: “There are innumerable groups […]. For the Dominicans, I love Dominicans, Dominican Youth Movement, and Dominican Youth. And for the Franciscans, amongst others, Brothers and sisters of St. Francis of Assisi; for the Carmelites, Carmelite Unite! For the Salesians, we mention only a few such as Famiglia Salesiana, the Salesian Youth Movement, or Salesians of don Bosco. For the Jesuits, this is as wide ranging as Jesuits in Facebook, a group that is open also to the laity, eIgnatiam Circle, which puts together persons who live the spirituality of Ignatius. Of particular interest are those groups whose membership is limited only to members of a particular Order and, as such, require prior approval of the subscriber, such as Jesuits in Formation, reserved exclusively to those Jesuits who are at the formation stage, so that they may have international contact, and might possibly ‘sight” responsible locals; and also The Jesuit Facebook Rec Room e Societas Iesu, open to everyone that belongs to the Order. Such is the case likewise of the group Missionaries Oblates of Mary Immaculate on Facebook, reserved for the coming together of members of the Congregation of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate.”
But apart from taking advantage of these tools for communication exchange, can Evangelization in this medium really be possible? The Regnum Christi Movement launched in March of 2009 the project Missionaries 2.0, an initiative with which they wish to take advantage of the social networking sites as “places” for evangelization, with prior training needed, for them to know how to do it, given the peculiarities of these sites.
The opportunity to communicate the Faith, to know other persons through the religious affiliation info on the personal info tab, to share initiatives, to develop projects which involve the spiritual dimension of men and women, whether as individuals or as groups, is something that is totally positive, since social sites permit the development of relationships via content (photos, personal info, videos, etc.). However, “reflecting on the significance of the new technologies, it is important to focus not just on their undoubted capacity to foster contact between people, but on the quality of the content that is put into circulation using these means”.
Each time a user loads new photos, music, videos, etc., he does it so that other people may see it or read it and, thus, be able to keep them updated on their lives and, at the same time, keep up-to-date with the lives of others: of what they do, what they like or think… In such social networking sites as Facebook, the ability to be in a relation with people has become the key success factor.
Accepting a new “friend” in a social networking site implies being willing to share with him or her one’s own list of friends and one’s own personal info, which in turn makes possible a kind of interchange and mutual knowledge.
One finds not a few introverted men and women who, on bumping into social networking sites, come out of their inwardness and become people who are able to relate well with other persons by means of these multiple linkages. The social sites’ applications allow us to add a variety of contents to our personal info tab, according to the creativity and technological dexterity of each one, so that these are left quite open to the contribution and additions of whoever wishes to develop further applications.
There is likewise the possibility of adding applications that point to what books one is reading, or that enable one to promote a cause that one wishes to defend, or invite one’s friends to rallies about to take place in real physical places; in addition, one can create fans’ clubs for famous people, or interest groups on a variety of topics. One of the resources available —perhaps one of the more ‘revolutionary’— is the availability of ‘meeting rooms’ for real events which, to a large extent, has come to replace the use of the telephone and even the use of email.
From the educational perspective, a social networking site has a lot to offer to this digital generation. If kids, adolescents and young ones of today learn through amusing ads with sound lasting a few seconds, if their attention span is short, and think more through images than with words, and are more given to processing electronic data, then why not take advantage of these new means of learning? Along these lines, social sites likewise are able to provide us the occasion for knowing, valuing and learning the good that there is in other cultures, opening us up to dialogue with people of different countries or creeds. “The new digital space, called cyberspace, allows us to find and get to know the values and traditions of others. Nevertheless, for those encounters to be fruitful, there is a need for honest and correct ways of expression, apart from attentive and respectful listening. Dialogue must be based on a sincere and reciprocal search for the truth, in order to enable the development of understanding and tolerance.
Aware of the educational potential of these social sites, there are people who have issued proposals for taking fuller advantage of this medium. Such is the case of Imbee.com, directed to girls and boys between the ages of 8 and 15, which also includes sections for teachers. [Translator’s note: This site is down indefinitely, as of this writing.]
3. Challenges
Notwithstanding all of the risks related to alienation, let it remain clear that “social networking sites permit a certain freedom of experimenting with new forms of contact, of relationships and of self-expression”. Prior to these new platforms, the Internet was a mere conglomeration of pages with content, but human relationships were not as yet as visible in the World Wide Web.
A. General
a. New “friends” and the issue of privacy
Different from many blogs or forums, where participants can intervene through a hidden identity, social networking sites are usually not places for being anonymous, but rather to enter into a relationship, the nature of which depends on what one does and what one is in reality.
Certainly, on reflecting one’s identity, there is the latent possibility of creating for oneself an artificial representation, such that one may appear more “attractive” for all those who are “hunting for friends” with specific characteristics. A personal profile can also be an occasion for narcissism, exhibitionism, or superficiality, since for many people the desire to come across as a socially attractive person —having many “friends” in social sites— has not ceased to be symptomatic. Neither is it strange to find people retouching photos in order to improve ad extra the articulation of the identity of the user.
In any case, there remains permanently open the temptation of making out of a social network an occasion for building a parallel world which, apart from causing alienation, can drown the weaker personalities or those who are less equipped in tendencies toward a more and more radical isolation from what is real social interaction.
The topic of “digital friendship” is another one of those pending subject matters. Initially, these social sites encompassed a friendship based on relations in real life, specifically in a university academic environment. If used as an opportunity to consolidate or recover those friendships that have disappeared through time or because of distance, these friendships must not lose their value. However, “digital friendship” also calls upon us to consider the risks involved when we allow computers, cellphones, other gadgets to isolate us from interpersonal relations based on real encounters. A new socio-digital bond might create an excessive dependence on others.
The applications of social networking sites enable individuals to write out detailed chronicles of their life experiences. In a certain sense, this means renouncing a privacy that we have decided to place in the hands of for-profit companies whose profits depend, in some way, on the confidence with which users put on their hands that ‘part’ of their life which they ‘load’ onto the social platform. It is not too much to be reminded that “one cannot allow oneself to be deceived by those who —whether in the topic of “friendship” or in that of privacy— only seek out consumers in a market with undifferentiated possibilities, where choice itself is presented as something good: the newness is confused with true beauty and subjective experience supplants truth.”
The concrete topic of privacy is one of those where we can pose many protests in many environments. An academic study on intimacy and social networks —done by Gross and Acquisti— reveal that the potential risk is high when it comes to personal info : on the basis of this personal info wall, even delinquent cybernauts can re-construct Social Security numbers. And, unfortunately, on not few occasions have we seen an outright carelessness, in part because of the lack of awareness of the public nature of the Internet.
All of the above may have posed more ethical considerations, and now it’s time for a major alert, considering that at least a quarter of users of social networking sites are minors.
b. Author Rights
Marketing and advertising through our PC screens remind us that social networks are not just mere philanthropic groups, but rather are firms which have profits in mind.
Along these lines, it wouldn’t be useless if I remind you that the most heavily used platforms are turning into property of those companies whose aim is to increase their revenues. Even if they offered a service, who is the ultimate owner of that information which one loads onto the Internet? What readiness could they have regarding such information? “Once you insert into the Web any information or message, it turns our very difficult for the sender to retain the title to its ownership. Messages can be taken and transformed easily, such that original authorship can be hard to establish. Legislators are now giving to this issue a lot of importance. There are computer hackers whose job it is to steal data and information on the Internet as if they were bank robbers. Who have custody of databases? Who have normal access to them without violating the corresponding professional secret? How do we avoid their ever treacherous bribery or assault?”
Here, just as in other issues related to the Internet, international legislation is needed with regard to prohibiting business entities from taking advantage of the trust of other people, no matter who these entities or the individuals are.
Through these social networking sites, by the very fact of the relational dynamics among persons, it has become possible to share content but many times setting aside their legitimate producers or distributors.
As we consider the above issues, we can make out two things: 1) on the one hand, we recognize the so-called “author rights” upon the content which its very user has produced (his photos, videos, text, etc.), and on the other hand, 2) the content of other people which many times users circulate or receive. There is no doubt that one has every right to that which he himself produces, while it does not do any harm to others, but he cannot do whatever he pleases with the product of others. The fact that de facto everybody steals everybody else’s intellectual property (let’s just think of music and videos that are passed around or shared) —something like the democratization of crime— is not at all equivalent to saying it ought not to be punished or, worse, that it is something good. “Criminal conduct in other contexts ought to be criminal conduct also in cyberspace”.
c. Education, responsibility and time
Since the family is the place where the first notions of good and evil, values and virtues, are learned, we also have the pending task of overcoming that generational gap between parents and children, concretely in what relates to the use of these modern means of communication, and more specifically in relation to social networking sites on the Net. Parents have the obligation to guide and supervise their children in the use of the Net. And if they will have to learn what they don’t know or what they know deficiently, then they would’ve profited by it.
Parents seem to have less and less time, and therefore they are unable to supervise what their kids do at home hundred percent of the time. Many of them don’t realize the evil that is within reach just by a mere unclick within the same home. Parents can be the role models for the prudent use of a given means of communication.
An adequate education helps users of social networking sites to discern better which is an authentic friendship and to identify the possible risks of confusing superficial and sporadic relationships with a true friendship. It is, thus, seen that human relations require time and direct knowledge.
Education implies a special emphasis on the responsibility for one’s actions. One cannot lose sight of the fact that whoever acts in social networking sites is the only real subject existing outside of such acts, and that, therefore, whatever action is carried out is the sole responsibility of him who effected it.
Therefore, there is responsibility accruing both in relation to what is uploaded onto the Net as well as to what is taken from it. The opportunity to share implies not only a relationship but also content; and within these, one can include violence as well as pornography. Given the above, “whoever takes on the sector that produces and distributes content via these new means ought to commit themselves to respecting the dignity and value of the human person […]. Whoever uses them ought to avoid sharing words or images that are degrading to the human person, and exclude therefore whatever incites to hatred or intolerance, whatever deprecates beauty and the intimacy of human sexuality, or whatever exploits those who are weak or defenseless”.
In light of the foregoing, we would not exaggerate if we emphasize on the need for education in the discernment not only of who to include as friend, but also everything else that is placed at the disposal of others through one’s profile as well as the amount of time invested in it. A modern opportunity cannot be turned into slavery. And to think that a social networking site demands a huge attention from its user: “…whatever message, photo or video which any friend inserts or loads presupposes a call which many times needs to be attended to through exchange of messages, of photos or videos. Uploading photos and videos in itself presupposes a certain amount of time invested…and time is running quickly”.
Considering all of this, there naturally arises a question: Does a student have time for it? At which moment of the day is an employee able to update his profile?
B. In relation to religion
It is indeed enlightening how many people are bringing to the digital world a witness to their Catholic faith, whether in an institutional manner —as for example his Parish or a Church group— or on a personal basis. The cases and initiatives cited above exemplify the way in which all the benefits of social networking sites can also apply to our life of faith. Unfortunately they also bring along those risks and negative points, and even with their own particular nuances.
a. Catholic faithful in general
Actual physical presence during moments of worship in the established places and times cannot be replaced by virtual presence. We cannot forget that “sacraments do not exist on the Internet, and even religious experiences by God’s grace are insufficient if they are separated from the interaction in the real world with other persons of faith”. It is necessary to find Christ “personally and to cultivate this relationship with Him through prayer, the Eucharist and the Sacrament of Reconciliation, reading and meditation of the Word of God, the study of Christian doctrine, service to others.”
It is likewise urgent, not only for believers, to take up the subject matter of having an adequate educational pedagogy in the use of the new means of communication in public schools, concretely in what refers to the Internet and those more commonly used forms of communication within the Net. More than dealing with the technical aspects, an ethical perspective is urgent which would serve as orientation for all those children and young ones who are, each time more, even at a tender age, becoming the frequent users of these social sites. It ought to be an education that teaches people “to form criteria of good taste and of true moral judgments, of aspects of formation of conscience”.
In this regard, “Universities, colleges and Catholic schools […] will have to offer courses for various groups, as well as an exquisite formation in matters of technology, administration, ethics and communications policy…”.
b. Priests, Religious men and women, Seminarians
The task of making sure that the Gospel is promoted, heard and received is also the primordial task of consecrated persons, who “by their very charism, acquire the commitment in the area of social communications”. This calling has been formulated and repeated in several official documents of the Church.
Luckily, there are each time more Priests, religious men and women who act like Gospel leaven in this digital continent. Focusing on social sites alone, many of them have also learned to attach their profiles so that they can broaden their pastoral action, by informing, forming and helping those faithful to mature on the basis of taking advantage of these new resources. Souls, thus, benefit and the apostolate is multiplied, turning out to be more effective, and even inspiring new vocations or bringing non-believers or people of other religions closer to Catholicism.
But the problems previously dealt with here also affect Priests —and consecrated persons in general—. Thus, they must review constantly their deeper reasons and motives for getting into these social networking sites. This awareness and balance will be the more solid the more adequate the education received in the use of the mass media, during their prior academic preparation for the apostolate and for direct dealings with souls.
As Fr. Álvaro Corcuera said in a Congress organized at the Pontifical Atheneum Regina Apostolorum in Rome, from 26th to 27th March 2004 —something that applies completely to the unique scope of the social networking sites—: “In the context of the formation for life of the religious, the means of social communication have a specific objective: they are useful to the extent that they can help in the intellectual, cultural, human and spiritual formation of the religious. Notwithstanding their positive value, their indiscriminate use constitutes a grave obstacle to the fidelity to their commitment to religious life, given its ability to lead towards interior dispersion, laxness, lack of discipline, waste of time, assimilation of criteria that are proper to a laicized world and the deformation of religious consciousness. Means are but means: they ought to be used in order to achieve ends which, as we have seen, are very specific in the life of the religious.”
Consecrated persons are agents of communication, but nowhere is it said that they ought to take on the roles of a communicator. In order for them to help more and serve better, laypeople are the ones who assume that important role, above all (but not exclusively) at the technical and operational level. A sense of apostolic effectiveness invites us not only to delegate but also to involve them.
The consecrated person can also fall into the banalization of interpersonal relationships that may occur in these social sites which, in the best of cases, might just make him or her waste time, time which could otherwise be devoted to souls.
Young seminarians, religious men and women, and consecrated individuals, just like other young people, have the same propensity to fall into the pathology of extreme dependence on the Internet which at times leads to making perseverance impossible, since it produces problems that may influence their behavior and psychological perception of themselves.
It is fitting to think that consecrated persons ought to continually ask themselves in a sort of examination of conscience where they could evaluate the time they invest in the Internet and social sites, as part of their vow or promise of poverty. Touching on the topic of the vow or promise of chastity, it is not too much to recall that a Priest or a consecrated person “cannot see everything, hear everything, say everything, taste everything… The Seminary —or house for formation— ought to enable him or her, within his/her interior freedom, to do much sacrifice and possess an intelligent and sincere discipline”. Regarding the promise or vow of obedience, it will always be a gesture of filial dependence to ask the necessary permission to navigate, with God’s blessing, through those sites that they need to visit. The spirit of discipline, both in the time used for these means of communication as well as in the choice of sites visited, is a trait of obedience as well.
Conclusion
Social networking sites permit users to see themselves and feel themselves part of a web of relations in which they can participate just with one click. More than being a change in the level of technology, which is also included, these sites encompass a change of usage. Therefore, they do not demand a new Ethics, but rather, the application of principles —which we already know— to new circumstances.
We know full well that means of social communication in general, and social networking sites in particular, are ethically neutral. Its goodness or evil would depend on human freedom, that is to say, on the use which man makes of it. “We cannot overemphasize the fact that the means of social communication are but instruments without their own soul.”
We cannot hide the fact that faith contributes positively toward criteria for the proper use of these venues, taking off from human reasoning and enriched by spiritual motives which are offered for their sake. In the end, what is at stake in social networking sites is to ensure that the human person “becomes indeed better, that is, more mature spiritually, more aware of human dignity, more responsible, more open to others, particularly to those in need and to the weaker ones, more available to give and lend their help to others”. Religion, thus, has the pressing task not only of using these sites in order to spread the Christian message, but also of integrating that message into this new culture.