danielskog.se

In a previous post I wrote about a JCMC article dealing with the concept of third places. Now I want to highlight another paper on this topic: Computer-mediated communication as a virtual third place: building Oldenburg’s great good places on the world wide web, written by Charles Soukup in New Media and Society.

The paper by Soukup does not include a comparison of any specific online environment and the generic model of a third place. Instead, this paper deals with the broader question of whether or not Oldenburg’s concept is appropriate when trying to understand computer-mediated communication (CMC).

I especially appreciate the section on how CMC contexts are unlike third places. It is argued that as third places emphasize localized community, are easily accessible, and function as social levellers, their virtual counterparts do not – at least not in the same way or to the same extent.

For the most part I find these arguments reasonable and I have since long advocated that online third places differ fundamentally from the ones depicted by Oldenburg. But as I understand the solution presented in this paper, we should still aim towards a perfect match with the characteristics of a physical third place – and I do not buy into that. Since online environments are indeed different than physical settings I don’t fancy the idea of trying to design online spaces using offline experiences as a design ideal. Instead, I want to study how the third place is mediated and experienced online – without assuming that it must be similar to offline experiences. It is not a goal in itself to find generic third places online. If the perfect third place does not exist online we should try to find a more appropriate concept instead of stubbornly holding on to something that only exist offline.

(Parts of this text has been posted earlier in my previous, since long discarded, blog.)