Proposition: Authors Hogan, Ellison, and Sessions, as well as the team of Rainie and Wellman, agree that weak

and strong social bonds are offered equally by ICT use. The two most discussed types of social bonds are known as strong and weak bonds (or bonding and bridging social capital). Strong bonds are what are usually thought of as friendships. The group by which one is usually surrounded is likely made up of ones strong bonds; they are basically close friends. This type of friendship is the kind of bond that many critics of social media believe is being lost through the growing popularity of online interaction. It may well be true that the recent rise in Internet use has decreased the amount of strong social bonds reported per person, but this is not to say that the total amount of social interaction has decreased with them. Instead, weak bonds have replaced them through social media use. These acquaintanceships, also known as bridging social capital, are what one uses to network. They may be friends of friends, or a vague acquaintance for instance, calling somebody one met at a party to ask about a job opportunity that came up in conversation would be putting ones bridging social capital to use. Although weak bonds are extremely useful in everyday life, critics believe that they are not sufficient to replace the strong friendships that used to be common. The team of Rainie and Wellman, as well as authors Sessions, Ellison and Hogan, agree that weak or bridging bonds are greatly represented in the social networking workd, although they remain highly underestimated. Rainie and Wellman start off their work, in fact, by bringing up the example of Trudy and Peter, who when in trouble reached out through social media and were greatly aided by those around them. This is an excellent example of the opportunities available through social networks. Acquaintances need not be known personally; bonds are often formed through anonymous posting websites. This is a more distant type of network, and often its users are best kept anonymous. The work of Lauren Sessions shows that anonymity, and in general weaker ties, are often better than their strong counterparts. The Internet world is made for weak bonds. When inperson meetups are organized for the members of MetaFilter, an online community, the overall community suffers. After meetups, attendees tend to talk almost exclusively to other attendees. They are drawn toward a stronger bond, but this alienates other users; in effect, it changes the overall dynamic of the site, which is designed for bridging social capital. If the point of the site is to make friends anonymously, but some (and only some) people violate that norm, there exists a huge imbalance in the overall dynamic of the site. Anonymous sites are not the only social networks conducive to bridging social capital. Surprisingly, Facebook is welldesigned for this purpose s well. Although Facebook is thought of as a website for strong or bridging bonds, its news feed and event-invitation features are welcome for those who are shy or who otherwise would not find out about events. This is especially true on a college campus, in which setting social interaction is necessary and expected. Of course, Facebook is also helpful for bonding social capital as well. By connecting through Facebook after forming a face-to-face friendship, users can converse though Facebook chat or make plans to meet in person. Through social media, one may not only continue close relationships, but also form them. Bernie Hogan reports on online dating statistics from 17 different countries worldwide.

Although his work describes what are clearly close bonds, he points out that many relationships that start online have origins not only on dating sites, but on other social media, including video games. Of course, this happens in person too; for instance, a couple may begin dating someone they met at a party through a mutual friend. Weak ties and networking abilities are important in offline situations; if online social networking is an extension of real life, weak ties are important online too. Hogan, Rainie/Wellman, Sessions, and Ellison believe that the use of social network does not detract from, and probably benefits, strong ties as well as bridging social bonding. Hogan especially states that the Internet can bring people together more closely than is apparently expected (ii). This refutes much of the antisocial media criticism, much of which addresses the opinion that online networking replaces interpersonal, real relationships. In Networked, Rainie and Wellman concede this point; indeed, they write, between the years of 1984 and 2005, the number of confidantes reported per capita in America dropped by 28% (117). However, the authors quickly point out that Americans have become not more lonely, but instead more individualized. Instead of metaphorical villages, people now connect on a single-person-to-single-person basis: groups have been replaced by networks (124). Indeed, weak ties are preferable to strong ties in some contexts. Sessions touches on this point with her work concerning the MetaFilter meet-ups. The changed dynamics of online interactions following the live encounters between only some of the users excludes those who were not able to assemble. In this case, strong ties are detracting from the quality of social media, and not vice versa. Anonymous social networking exists alongside those sites that encourage and facilitate online bonding, but do not detract from existing close friendships. Ellison is also of the opinion that social networks are conducive to gaining bonding social capital. Facebook particularly makes it easy to grow closer to pre-existing friends; in fact, Ellison states that Internet users overall are more likely than non-users to receive help from core network members. This goes beyond maintained social capital -- a theory involving previous relationships that still exist but remain distant into real friendship. Rhetorical Outline Audience: My audience definitely has to know something about social networking, and preferably be familiar with particular sites, including Facebook. Theoretically, then, my idea audience is on the younger side; I want them to be able to navigate the Internet. However, I would like my idea audience member to have graduated high school, at least, to have experienced the different levels possible of friend groups. Goal: My goal is to accurately convey the claims of the five authors I am studying. If my goal is fulfilled, my audience will have a good understanding of the two points that make up the body of my essay that weak bonds are underestimated and that IT use is conducive to strong bonds and the reasoning of the different authors regarding these points.

Plan: I believe that I fulfilled my goal, because for each of my two reasons I provided background information and definitions for the terms I used that might otherwise have been confusing. I also represented each author in my body paragraphs, and their different angles on the two issues I conveyed. Key Terms: Social capital; Social networking; Bridging; Bonding; Weak bonds; Strong bonds; Connection; Interaction; Facebook; Online; Offline. Logical Outline (Thus) All four authors studied agree that ICT use is equally conducive to bridging and bonding social capital. (Because) Although it is not well understood, ICTs bring great facility to gaining weak social bonds. (That is) The Internet is well-designed for bridging social capital. (For example) The website MetaFilter is an example of a website used best when at a distance and anonymous. (That is) When stronger social bonds are brought into the MetaFilter community, the quality of the websites interactions is reduced. (That is) Another example of social media being used for bridging social capital is Facebook. (Granted) Facebook is often thought of as a medium designed to bring close friends closer. (That is) That is, Facebook is usually associated with bonding social capital. (However) It turns out, however, that Facebook is quite conducive to forming weak bonds. (That is) Many features of Facebook allow people to connect without needing to know much about their new acquaintances. (Because) These four authors believe that ICTS do not detract from strong connections, and may benefit them. (That is) People grow close on social media. (For example) Many couples that meet online do so not only through dating sites but through other social media as well. (That is) In some instances online, strong bonds are not the best option. (For example) It has been shown that an offline meetup of an online interaction site detracts from the overall quality of the site.